On Keynesian Economics and the Economics of Keynes: A Study in Monetary Theory [Hardcover]

Axel Leijonhufvud (Author)

Product Details

• Hardcover: 466 pages
• Publisher: Oxford University Press, USA (December 31, 1968)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0195009487
• ISBN-13: 978-0195009484
• Product Dimensions: 9 x 6.2 x 1.2 inches
• Shipping Weight: 1.6 pounds
• Average Customer Review: 4.0 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (1 customer review)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #2,259,043 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

1 of 2 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars Leijonhufvud overlooked chapter 21(and 20)in the GT., March 29, 2005

By 

Michael Emmett Brady "mandmbrady" (Bellflower, California ,United States) - See all my reviews
(VINE VOICE)    (REAL NAME)   

This review is from: On Keynesian Economics and the Economics of Keynes: A Study in Monetary Theory (Hardcover)

Leijonhufvud(L) shows in this book that there is more to the economics of the General Theory(GT;1936)and Keynes than the Income-Expenditure model and the IS-LM model.L correctly shows that the typical mid 1960's exposition of Keynesian economics in the textbooks had incorporated a number of errors compared to the Keynes of the A Treatise on Money(1930;TM) and the GT combined.L was correct to argue that the monetary emphasis of the TM was not contradicted by the apparent superficial treatment of monetary questions in the GT.Unfortunately,L completely overlooked Keynes's mathematical incorporation of his multiple equilibrium generalization of the special neoclassical theory of a single optimal equilibrium in chapter 21 of the GT on pp.304-306 of the GT in Keynes's generalized quantity theory of money equation,which ,of course,incorporated the chapter 20 analysis which Keynes restricted to the interaction between the labor and the goods markets.Chapter 21's generalized quantity theory of money equation analysis and exposition in the form of elasticities,which Keynes downplayed, would have cinched L's argument that the GT is in fact a clear extension of the TM.L went astray by completely overlooking the nature of the mathematical D-Z model in the chapter in his book titled"Aggregative Structure of Alternative Models".Contrary to L ,Keynes presented both one and two sector models and makes clear use of an aggregated production function in the analysis of chapters 20 and 21.Thus,L's second purpose,to put forth a subjective ,positve alternative to the textbook Keynesianism of the mid 1960's,was not successful.I recommend this book because L successfully presented the case that any interpretation of the GT will be misleading if it fails to ground the GT in the TM.