Edited by Robert W. Dimand and Harald Hagemann
Chapter 34: Say’s law
Keynes attacked Say’s law because for him the acceptance of Say’s law of markets implied the full-employment assumption. However, the meaning of Say’s law as well as the underlying assumptions have changed over time. A classical economist such as Ricardo could easily combine his adherence to Say’s law with the analysis of the machinery problem, that is, the existence of technological unemployment. Keynes in his critique of Say’s law, as well as earlier Marx whom Keynes attested a “pregnant observation”, focused on the consequences of the store of value-function of money allowing the separation of the acts to sell and to buy, an argument first developed by John Stuart Mill and Wilhelm Roscher. In contrast to Mill and Roscher, who did not develop an asset motive to hold money, Keynes elaborated the speculative demand for money into his liquidity preference theory. He strongly rejected the idea that the interest mechanism would equilibrate savings and investment.
You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.
Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.
Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.
Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.