Primary and Secondary Markets
The analytical starting point determines the course of a theoretical investigation and, ultimately, the productiveness of an approach. The classics took production and accumulation as their point of departure; the neoclassics, exchange. Exchange implies behavioral assumptions and notions like rationality, optimization, and equilibrium. It is widely recognized that this approach has led into a cul-de-sac. To change a theory means to change its premises; or, in Keynes's words, to "throw over" the axioms. The present paper swaps the standard behavioral axioms for structural axioms and applies the latter to the analysis of the emergence of secondary markets from the flow part of the economy. Real and nominal residuals at first give rise to the accumulation of the stock of money and the stock of commodities. These stocks constitute the demand-and-supply side of secondary markets. The pricing in these markets is different from the pricing in the primary markets. Realized appreciation in the secondary markets is different from income or profit. To treat primary and secondary markets alike is therefore a category mistake. Vice versa, to take a set of objective propositions as the analytical starting point yields a comprehensive and consistent theory of market exchange and valuation.
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.:
- Kakarot-Handtke, Egmont, 2011.
"Keynes’s missing axioms,"
31179, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- Kakarot-Handtke, Egmont, 2011. "The pure logic of value, profit, interest," MPRA Paper 30853, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- K. Vela Velupillai, 2004.
"The unreasonable ineffectiveness of mathematics in economics,"
Department of Economics Working Papers
0406, Department of Economics, University of Trento, Italia.
- K. Vela Velupillai, 2005. "The unreasonable ineffectiveness of mathematics in economics," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 29(6), pages 849-872, November.
- K. Vela Velupillai, 2004. "The Unreasonable Ineffectiveness of Mathematics in Economics," Working Papers 0080, National University of Ireland Galway, Department of Economics, revised 2004.
- Kakarot-Handtke, Egmont, 2011.
"Reconstructing the Quantity Theory (II),"
32542, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- Kakarot-Handtke, Egmont, 2011. "Properties of an economy without human beings," MPRA Paper 31497, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- Frank Ackerman, 2001. "Still dead after all these years: interpreting the failure of general equilibrium theory," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(2), pages 119-139.
- Mirowski,Philip, 2002. "Machine Dreams," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521775267, 1.
- Keuzenkamp, H.A. & McAleer, M., 1994. "Simplicity, scientific inference and econometric modelling," Discussion Paper 1994-56, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
- Mirowski,Philip, 2002. "Machine Dreams," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521772839, 1.
- Kakarot-Handtke, Egmont, 2011. "Squaring the investment cycle," MPRA Paper 32895, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- Stephen F. Le Roy, 2004. "Rational Exuberance," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 42(3), pages 783-804, September.
- Tobin, James, 1980. "Are New Classical Models Plausible Enough to Guide Policy?," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 12(4), pages 788-99, November.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:lev:wrkpap:wp_741. 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: (Marie-Celeste Edwards)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.