Zinssatz, Profitrate und Reswitching — Wie relevant ist das Reswitching-Phänomen?
JOURNAL ARTICLE
Cite JOURNAL ARTICLE
Style
Format
Zinssatz, Profitrate und Reswitching — Wie relevant ist das Reswitching-Phänomen?
Journal of Contextual Economics – Schmollers Jahrbuch, Vol. 94 (1974), Iss. 4 : pp. 363–386
Additional Information
Article Details
Jaeger, Klaus
References
-
Debreu, G. (1965), Theory of Value, Cowles Foundation Monograph 17, New York 1965.
Google Scholar -
Dougherty, C. R. S. (1972), On the Rate of Return and the Rate of Profit, Economic Journal 82 (1972) S. 1324- 1350.
Google Scholar -
Gallaway, L. and V.Shukla (1974), The Neoclassical Production Function, American Economic Review 64 (1974).
Google Scholar -
Harcourt, G. C. (1972), Some Cambridge Controversies in the Theory of Capital, Cambridge University Press 1972.
Google Scholar -
Hirshleifer, B. J. (1970), Investment, Interest and Capital, Englewood Cliffs (N. J.) 1970.
Google Scholar -
Nuti, D. M. (1974), On the Rates of Return on Investment, Kyklos 27 (1974) S. 345 - 369.
Google Scholar -
Pasinetti, L.L. (1969), Switches of Technique and the „Rate of Return“ in Capital Theory, Economic Journal 79 (1969) S. 508 ££. (1972), Reply to Mr. Dougherty, Economic Journal 82 (1972) S. 1351 - 1352. (1974), A Reply to Dr. Nuti on the Rate of Return, Kyklos 27 (1974) S.37-3703. Riese, H. (1970), Das Ende einer Wachstumstheorie, Kyklos 23 (1970) S. 756 bis 771. (1971), Das Finale vom Ende einer Wachstumstheorie, Kyklos 24 (1971) S. 102 - 103.
Google Scholar -
Robinson, J. (1970), Capital Theory Up to Date, Canadian Journal of Economics 3 (1970) S.30-3197. (1971 a), Economic Heresies, Some old fashioned questions in economic theory, London 1971. (1971 b), Capital Theory Up to Date: A Reply, Canadian Journal of Economics 4 (1971) S. 254 - 256.
Google Scholar -
Solow, R. M. (1962), Substitution and Fixed Proportions in the Theory of Capital, Review of Economic Studies 29 (1962) S. 207 - 218. (1970), On the Rate of Return: Reply to Pasinetti, Economic Journal 80 (1970) S. 427.
Google Scholar -
Weizsäcker, C.C. von (1971), Ende einer Wachstumstheorie? Kyklos 24 (1971) S. 97-101.
Google Scholar
Abstract
The issue is considered, whether the possibility of reswitching of techniques influences the explanatory value of neoclassical growth theory. In an intertemporal decision model it is shown, that neoclassical growth theory can only describe growth equilibria, but not explain the growth process itself, because the profit rate, an important variable for the investment decisions of entrepreneurs, and therefore also the income distribution are not determined within this framework. This is completely independent of the existence of reswitching. Therefore the controversies in capital theory have mostly missed the real problem of growth theory, i.e. the explanation of the disequilibrium transition process.
Table of Contents
| Section Title | Page | Action | Price |
|---|---|---|---|
| Klaus Jaeger: Zinssatz, Profitrate und Reswitching. Wie relevant ist das Reswitching-Phänomen? | 363 | ||
| Zusammenfassung | 385 | ||
| Summary | 385 | ||
| Literatur | 385 |