This paper examines the treatment of the Fisher effect in Keynes's General Theory and in various Keynesian and post-Keynesian writings. It is argued that Keynes was not entirely fair to Irving Fisher but, nonetheless, that the General Theory provides the basis for a critique of Fisher's argument. Models due to R. A. Mundell and T. Sargent are analyzed, clarified, and used to identify the basis for a Keynesian rationalization of a lagged and partial Fisher effect--a rationalization superior to Fisher's own, which ran in terms of long lags in expectations formation. Post-Keynesian contributions stemming from R. Harrod are examined and criticized on the grounds of their incompleteness.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Allin Cottrell (1994) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: