IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/hop/hopeec/v32y2000i2p293-316.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

IS-LM à la Hicks versus IS-LM à la Modigliani

Author

Listed:
  • Michael De Vroey

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to revisit Hicks‚ "Mr Keynes and the Classics" article. It is argued that Hicks' own model, his IS-LL model, is significantly different from the subsequent textbook IS-LM models. In short, Hicks' classical model exhibits involuntary unemployment and allows for monetary expansion to have real effects, features which are absent in subsequent standard models. I also argue that Modigliani's 1944 article has played an important role in recasting Hicks initial model. Thus a distinction ought to be drawn between "IS-LM à la Hicks" and "IS-LM à la Modigliani", modern IS-LM models being molded on the latter. Hence the conclusion that the transition from Keynes' to Keynesian economics is a two-step process, its first stage concerning the passage from the General Theory to Hicks' model, its second stage the shift from Hicks' use of the IS-LM framework to Modigliani's recasting.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Michael De Vroey, 2000. "IS-LM à la Hicks versus IS-LM à la Modigliani," History of Political Economy, Duke University Press, vol. 32(2), pages 293-316, Summer.
    • Handle: RePEc:hop:hopeec:v:32:y:2000:i:2:p:293-316
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hope.dukejournals.org/content/32/2/293.full.pdf+html
    File Function: link to full text
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

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

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Michel De Vroey, 2012. "Microfoundations: A Decisive Dividing Line between Keynesian and New Classical Macroeconomics?," Chapters, in: Microfoundations Reconsidered, chapter 5, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    2. Michel De Vroey, 2004. "The History of Macroeconomics Viewed against the Background of the Marshall-Walras Divide," History of Political Economy, Duke University Press, vol. 36(5), pages 57-91, Supplemen.
    3. Edward Nelson, 2004. "Money and the Transmission Mechanism in the Optimizing IS-LM Specification," History of Political Economy, Duke University Press, vol. 36(5), pages 271-304, Supplemen.
    4. Michel De Vroey & Pierre Malgrange, 2012. "Klein et l’émergence de la modélisation macroéconomique," Économie et Statistique, Programme National Persée, vol. 451(1), pages 21-30.
    5. Michel De Vroey & Pierre Malgrange, 2012. "From The Keynesian Revolution to the Klein-Goldberger model: Klein and the dynamization of Keynesian theory," History of Economic Ideas, Fabrizio Serra Editore, Pisa - Roma, vol. 20(2), pages 113-136.
    6. Michael D. Bordo & Anna J. Schwartz, 2004. "IS-LM and Monetarism," History of Political Economy, Duke University Press, vol. 36(5), pages 217-239, Supplemen.
    7. Antonella Rancan, 2014. "Modigliani's comments on Sylos Labini's theory of unemployment (1956-1958)," PSL Quarterly Review, Economia civile, vol. 67(270), pages 269-282.
    8. Béraud, Alain, 2003. "Keynes et Pigou sur le salaire monétaire et l’emploi : une synthèse du débat," L'Actualité Economique, Société Canadienne de Science Economique, vol. 79(1), pages 147-162, Mars-Juin.
    9. Michel De Vroey, 2001. "L'histoire des théories économiques sous le prisme de l'hétérodoxie. Une analyse critique de l'Histoire de la pensée économique de Ghislain Deleplace," Cahiers d'Économie Politique, Programme National Persée, vol. 38(1), pages 115-133.
    10. Goulven Rubin, 2002. "From equilibrium to disequilibrium: the genesis of Don Patinkin's interpretation of the Keynesian theory," The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(2), pages 205-225.
    11. Rancan, Antonella, 2012. "Modigliani's 1944 Wage Rigidity Assumption and the Construction of the Neoclassical Synthesis," Economics & Statistics Discussion Papers esdp12069, University of Molise, Department of Economics.

    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:hop:hopeec:v:32:y:2000:i:2:p:293-316. 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: Center for the History of Political Economy Webmaster (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.dukeupress.edu/Catalog/ViewProduct.php?viewby=journal&productid=45614 .

    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.