IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/cambje/v42y2018i1p155-175..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Semi-autonomous household expenditures as the causa causans of postwar US business cycles: the stability and instability of Luxemburg-type external markets
[Cycles and trends in US net borrowing flows]

Author

Listed:
  • Brett Fiebiger

Abstract

Similar patterns can be observed in post-WWII US business cycles. The initial upswings tend to be led by household investment and debt-financed personal consumption expenditures, which then wane in relative importance, and lead downswings. As those expenditures are financed in significant part by money creation, they function as an external market—driving accumulation by enabling monetary profit realisation—in a way analogous to Rosa Luxemburg’s treatment of the public and foreign sectors. Empirical studies on wage-led/profit-led demand regimes typically exclude household investment or include it in with business investment. This paper argues that it is vital to distinguish an independent role for ‘semi-autonomous’ household expenditures as a driver of effective demand and cyclical dynamics. The failure to do so in empirical studies sustains misleading conclusions such as the perceived relevance of Goodwin-type profit squeeze cycles.

Suggested Citation

  • Brett Fiebiger, 2018. "Semi-autonomous household expenditures as the causa causans of postwar US business cycles: the stability and instability of Luxemburg-type external markets [Cycles and trends in US net borrowing fl," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 42(1), pages 155-175.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:cambje:v:42:y:2018:i:1:p:155-175.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/cje/bex019
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

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

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Ryan Woodgate & Eckhard Hein & Ricardo Summa, 2024. "Components of Autonomous Demand Growth and Financial Feedbacks: Implications for Growth Drivers and Growth Regime Analysis," Review of Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(5), pages 1876-1893, November.
    2. Eckhard Hein & Ryan Woodgate, 2021. "Stability issues in Kaleckian models driven by autonomous demand growth—Harrodian instability and debt dynamics," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 72(2), pages 388-404, May.
    3. Hansen, Mads R., 2024. "Demand regimes and the business-cycle: Feedback effects between capacity utilization and income distribution taking into account overhead labor - SVAR-estimates for Germany (2007 - 2021)," IPE Working Papers 227/2024, Berlin School of Economics and Law, Institute for International Political Economy (IPE).
    4. Pedrosa, Ítalo & Brochier, Lídia & Freitas, Fabio, 2023. "Debt hierarchy: Autonomous demand composition, growth and indebtedness in a Supermultiplier model," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    5. Allain, Olivier, 2022. "A supermultiplier model with two non-capacity-generating semi-autonomous demand components," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 91-103.
    6. Marcio Santetti, Michalis Nikiforos, Rudiger von Arnim, 2022. "Growth, cycles, and residential investment," Working Paper Series, Department of Economics, University of Utah 2022_04, University of Utah, Department of Economics.
    7. Santetti, Marcio & Nikiforos, Michalis & von Arnim, Rudiger, 2024. "Growth, cycles, and residential investment," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 313-327.
    8. Marcio Santetti, 2023. "A time-varying finance-led model for U.S. business cycles," Papers 2310.05153, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2024.
    9. Eckhard Hein, 2019. "Harrodian instability in Kaleckian models and Steindlian solutions," FMM Working Paper 46-2019, IMK at the Hans Boeckler Foundation, Macroeconomic Policy Institute.
    10. Marc Lavoie, 2020. "Was Hyman Minsky a post-Keynesian economist?," Review of Evolutionary Political Economy, Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 85-101, May.
    11. Eckhard Hein & Valeria Jimenez, 2022. "The macroeconomic implications of zero growth: a post-Keynesian approach," European Journal of Economics and Economic Policies: Intervention, Edward Elgar Publishing, vol. 19(1), pages 41-60, April.
    12. Jose Barrales-Ruiz & Codrina Rada & Rudiger von Arnim, 2024. "Evidence on Goodwin cycles across US golden age and neoliberal era," Working Papers 2410, New School for Social Research, Department of Economics.
    13. Stephen Thompson, 2022. "“The total movement of this disorder is its order”: Investment and utilization dynamics in long‐run disequilibrium," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 73(2), pages 638-682, May.
    14. Ettore Gallo & Mark Setterfield, 2022. "Historical Time and the Current State of Post-Keynesian Growth Theory," Working Papers 2204, New School for Social Research, Department of Economics.
    15. Nah, Won Jun & Lavoie, Marc, 2019. "The role of autonomous demand growth in a neo-Kaleckian conflicting-claims framework’," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 427-444.
    16. Herr, Hansjörg, 2021. "Macroeconomic transformation of capitalism - How to achieve politically determined growth rates?," IPE Working Papers 170/2021, Berlin School of Economics and Law, Institute for International Political Economy (IPE).
    17. Won Jun Nah & Lavoie, Marc, 2018. "Overhead labour costs in a neo-Kaleckian growth model with autonomous expenditures," IPE Working Papers 111/2018, Berlin School of Economics and Law, Institute for International Political Economy (IPE).
    18. Barbieri Góes, Maria Cristina & Deleidi, Matteo, 2022. "Output determination and autonomous demand multipliers: An empirical investigation for the US economy," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).

    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:oup:cambje:v:42:y:2018:i:1:p:155-175.. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/cje .

    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.