IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Une ambiguïté de la relation entre Keynes et Malthus : Rejet de la loi de Say, monnaie et rapport salarial

Listed author(s):
  • Martin, Catherine

    (Université de Paris 1)

Registered author(s):

    As is well known, Keynes agreed with Malthus about the possibility for the effective demand to be deficient and its links with “the economy in which we happen to live”. But analysing Malthus’ point of view about the origins of a general glut allows us to doubt the agreement between the two authors. In fact, Malthus did not really care about money – he did not deal with a non neutral money, in opposition to what Keynes claims – but was concerned with the specificity of the capital-labour relationship. Il est connu que Keynes se sentait une filiation avec Malthus, concernant la possibilité d’une déficience de la demande effective, et la nécessité d’en rendre compte de manière conforme à la « réalité », « au monde dans lequel nous vivons effectivement ». À partir d’une analyse de Malthus concernant les crises de surproduction générale, nous montrons que cette parenté est plus problématique que ce que Keynes laisse entendre. En effet, contrairement à ce qu’affirme ce dernier, la réalité dont Malthus cherchait à rendre compte n’était pas la monnaie – qui finalement reste neutre dans son analyse – mais la spécificité de la relation capital-travail salarié.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    Article provided by Société Canadienne de Science Economique in its journal L'Actualité économique.

    Volume (Year): 79 (2003)
    Issue (Month): 1 (Mars-Juin)
    Pages: 117-132

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:ris:actuec:v:79:y:2003:i:1:p:117-132
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    More information through EDIRC

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

    in new window

    1. Catherine Martin, 1982. "Demande et formation des prix dans la théorie classique : le débat entre Ricardo et Malthus," Cahiers d'Économie Politique, Programme National Persée, vol. 7(1), pages 31-50.
    2. V. E. Smith, 1956. "Malthus'S Theory Of Demand And Its Influence On Value Theory1," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 3(3), pages 205-220, October.
    3. Olivier Favereau, 1988. "La Théorie Générale : de l'Economie Conventionnelle à l'Economie des Conventions," Cahiers d'Économie Politique, Programme National Persée, vol. 14(1), pages 197-220.
    4. Catherine Martin, 1986. "Variation du salaire réel et surproduction générale : un aspect de l'opposition entre T.R. Malthus et R. Torrens," Cahiers d'Économie Politique, Programme National Persée, vol. 12(1), pages 73-88.
    5. Costabile, Lilia, 1983. "Natural Prices, Market Prices and Effective Demand in Malthus," Australian Economic Papers, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(4), pages 144-170, June.
    6. F. Cameron Maclachlan, 1999. "The Ricardo-Malthus Debate on Underconsumption: A Case Study in Economic Conversation," History of Political Economy, Duke University Press, vol. 31(3), pages 563-574, Fall.
    7. Thomas Sowell, 1963. "The General Glut Controversy Reconsidered," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 15(3), pages 193-203.
    8. Costabile, Lilia & Rowthorn, Bob, 1985. "Malthus's Theory of Wages and Growth," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 95(378), pages 418-437, June.
    9. S. Hollander, 1969. "Malthus and the Post-Napoleonic Depression," History of Political Economy, Duke University Press, vol. 1(2), pages 306-335, Fall.
    10. Rutherford, R P, 1987. "Malthus and Keynes," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 39(1), pages 175-189, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ris:actuec:v:79:y:2003:i:1:p:117-132. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Bruce Shearer)

    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.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.