IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/cambje/v30y2006i6p981-984.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comments on Cesaratto's 'Transition to fully funded pension schemes: a non-orthodox criticism'

Author

Listed:
  • Thomas R. Michl

Abstract

Cesaratto's critique of the neoclassical approach to pension reform is valuable, but he has overextended his argument in applying it to proposals to use pre-funding as a mechanism for achieving greater public ownership and for redistributing wealth progressively. The fiscal surpluses needed to pre-fund the public pension system could increase investment, provided that they are offset by an appropriately stimulating monetary policy. The post-Keynesian investment literature descending from Kalecki's principle of increasing risk motivates on non-neoclassical grounds the interest sensitivity of investment required to make this policy mix effective. Copyright 2006, Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Thomas R. Michl, 2006. "Comments on Cesaratto's 'Transition to fully funded pension schemes: a non-orthodox criticism'," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 30(6), pages 981-984, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:cambje:v:30:y:2006:i:6:p:981-984
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/cje/bel025
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sergio Cesaratto, 2008. "The Macroeconomics of the Pension Fund Reform and the case of the TFR reform in Italy," Department of Economics University of Siena 549, Department of Economics, University of Siena.
    2. Thomas R. Michl, 2013. "Public debt, growth, and distribution," Review of Keynesian Economics, Edward Elgar Publishing, vol. 1(1), pages 120-144, January.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:cambje:v:30:y:2006:i:6:p:981-984. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/cje .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.