Titlebook: Cambridge Monetary Thought; The Development of S Pascal Bridel Book 1987 Palgrave Macmillan, a division of Macmillan Publishers Limited 198

BREED

書目名稱Cambridge Monetary Thought影響因子(影響力)




書目名稱Cambridge Monetary Thought影響因子(影響力)學(xué)科排名




書目名稱Cambridge Monetary Thought網(wǎng)絡(luò)公開度




書目名稱Cambridge Monetary Thought網(wǎng)絡(luò)公開度學(xué)科排名




書目名稱Cambridge Monetary Thought被引頻次




書目名稱Cambridge Monetary Thought被引頻次學(xué)科排名




書目名稱Cambridge Monetary Thought年度引用




書目名稱Cambridge Monetary Thought年度引用學(xué)科排名




書目名稱Cambridge Monetary Thought讀者反饋




書目名稱Cambridge Monetary Thought讀者反饋學(xué)科排名

環(huán)形

Introduction,hed light on some neglected aspects and contributions to this technique of analysis. In particular Hawtrey’s income approach (1913), Robertson’s ‘forced-saving’ doctrine (1926) and Keynes’s pre-1936 analysis of the speculative demand for money (1930) clearly stand apart as the main original building

Bumptious

Introduction,of the Cambridge School in the first part of this century. This analysis, which involves analysing the impact of changes in the market-rate of interest on the economy through its effect on the supply of savings and the volume of investment rather than through changes in the money-supply and price-le

Occipital-Lobe

,Marshall’s Monetary Theory,heory by means of the cash-balance equation. For Marshall the value of money is determined by the use of ordinary supply-and-demand curves in perfect accord with the same laws on which his general theory of value is based. In his own words ‘the value of [money] is determined by the relation in which

conjunctiva

,Early Contributions I: Hawtrey and Robertson (1911–24),g Cambridge economists to revise and improve Marshall’s monetary theory (see, e.g., Eshag, 1963, p. 97; Kahn, 1984, p. 17). Yet if it is undoubtedly true that the 1920s and 1930s were two decades of ‘high theory’, particularly in Cambridge, it would be wrong to ignore the refinement already brought

Pudendal-Nerve

,Early Contributions II: Keynes, Lavington and Pigou (1913–24),he Marshallian orthodoxy. From his two . theoretical contributions (his 1913 paper given to the Political Economy Club, JMK, xiii, pp. 1–14 and section I of the third chapter of ., 1923, JMK, iv, pp. 61–70), the first one only brings new elements of interest to our argument. In the . the refinements

Pudendal-Nerve

CORE

The , and the Principle of Effective Demand, one hand, there is today no accepted view of what it was exactly that Keynes actually accomplished (be it at the purely theoretical level or even what his Schumpeterian ‘vision’ was). Practically every economist is keen to offer his own idiosyncratic interpretation of Keynes’s ., differing of cours

動物

避開

Cortical Morphological Changes in Dementiaof the Cambridge School in the first part of this century. This analysis, which involves analysing the impact of changes in the market-rate of interest on the economy through its effect on the supply of savings and the volume of investment rather than through changes in the money-supply and price-le