1978Fasc. 1, 5-20 THE ORGANIC COMPOSITION OF CAPITAL JOAN ROBINSON* 「資本の有機的構成」という概念は、マルクス分析の重要な要素である。利益率低下論との関連から、新古典派の「資本と労働の比率」という概念に類似していると考えられてきたが、後者がSRAFFAの批判によって粉砕されているので*、同じ観点から前者を再調査する必要がある。I MARXが形式的な分析を行った際の表記は、非常に分かりにくいものであった。例えば、1週間あるいは1年間の生産の流れを価値で表すと、c+v+s、すなわち、既存の生産手段、賃金、剰余金のストックの減少の価値で表される。
1 / 16
-
201% + 8
KYKLOS, Vol. 31 - 1978- Fasc. 1, 5-20
THE ORGANIC COMPOSITION
OF CAPITAL
JOAN ROBINSON*
The concept of 'the organic composition of capital' is an important
element in Marxian analysis; because of its connection with a theory
of a falling rate of profit, it has been taken to resemble the neoclassical
concept of 'the ratio of capital to labour' and since the latter has been
pulverised by SRAFFA's critique¹ it is necessary to re-examine the
former in the same light.
I
The notation in which MARX set out his formal analysis is very con-
fusing. A flow of production, say per week or per year, in terms of
value is expressed as c+v+s, that is, the values of the depletion in the
pre-existing stock of means of production, of wages and of surplus.
The discovery that the rate of interest is not dictated by economic necessity, but is more or less arbitrarily fixed by the authorities creates an entirely ...
"The purpose of studying economics is not to acquire a set of ready-made answers to economic questions, but to learn how to avoid being deceived by economists.” Joan Robinson
Delhi School of Economics as Occasional Paper No.9収録のMarx, Marshall And Keynes(1955)
In 1940, as a distraction from the news, I began to read Marx.
Seeing Capital in the light of the Keynesian revolution, I found
much in it that the professed Marxist seemed to have overlooked.
They had replied to Keynes with the slogans of sound finance and
the gold standard. Only Kalecki had seen the point of the schema
of expanded reproduction in Volume II of Capital and he had built
a 'Keynesian' theory on them. For me, the main message of Marx
was the need to think in terms of history, not of equilibrium. This,
of course, was the message of the Keynesian revolution too, but I
had applied it only in short-period terms. I had been so much under
the influence of Pigou's methodology that I had written a 'Long-
period Theory of Employment' in terms of comparisons of stationary
states with different rates of interest. Now I began to catch a glimpse
of an approach that would emancipate us from the dominance of
equilibrium analysis.
As for the labour theory of value, I could not make out what the
fuss was about. It seemed obvious that the transformation problem,
that is, finding a system of prices yielding a uniform rate of profit
for all capitalists, was just a puzzle (though it was not solved till
Sraffa showed the way). Nothing of importance could turn on it.
ジョーン·ロビンソンの序文 … 1940年に,〔戦争に明け暮れる] ニュースからの気晴らしのつもりで,わた しはマルクス (Karl Marx, 1818 ~ 83) を読み始めた。ケインズ革命の光に照 らして『資本論』を読むことによって,わたしはマルクス主義者を自認してい る人々が見過ごしてきたように思われる多くのものをそのなかに見いだした。 マルクス主義者は健全財政と金本位制のスローガンをもってケインズに応酬し ていた。そのなかでカレッキーだけが『資本論』第II巻の拡大再生産表式の要 点を理解していて,その基礎のうえに「ケインズ的」理論をうち建てたのであ る。わたしにとってマルクスの主要な教示は,均衡の見地からではなく歴史の 見地から思考しなければいけないということであった。このことは,もちろん ケインズ革命の教示でもあった。 … （クリーゲル政治経済学の再構築1978^1973？年3頁） 参考： Stephanie Kelton (@StephanieKelton) 2020/01/13 7:46 Joan Robinson (1943) on the “logic” of austerity. pic.twitter.com/aRooHKEXqh
https://twitter.com/stephaniekelton/status/1216491689218641922?s=21 1945完全雇用の問題 "The Economics of Full Employment", 1945, EJ. https://cpb-us-e1.wpmucdn.com/blogs.roosevelt.edu/dist/f/76/files/2012/12/Robinson-on-the-Problem-of-Full-Employment.pdf p.33 9. some Fallacies 1. “the treasury view” During the great slump it was the official view that Government investment cannot increase employment. The argument ran: there is a certain amount of saving going on at any time, and if more savings are invested by the Government, less will be available for private enterprise. T his overlooks the fact that if there is more investment there will be a higher level of activity and of incomes and consequently more saving. T he argument is so childish that it would not deceive anyone who had not a strong wish to believe it. Nevertheless, it was for many years the basis of Government policy, and was set out in a famous White Paper in 1929. 2. “economy” The National Government which was formed in 1931 went in for a great economy campaign. Local authorities were compelled to cease work on building schemes, roads, fen drainage, and so forth. An emergency budget was introduced, increasing taxation, cutting unemployment allowances and reducing the pay of public servants, such as teachers and the armed forces. Private citizens felt it was patriotic to spend less. Some Cambridge Colleges gave up their traditional feasts as a recognition of the crisis. All this helped to increase unemployment and make the economic situation of the country still more depressed. Nowadays there is considerably more understanding of how things work and it is unlikely that such a completely idiotic policy will be tried again. 3. the Burden oF the national debt The National Debt is often brought forward as an argument against public spending to create employment. There is a good deal of confusion between the National Debt and the debt of an individual. An individual who is in debt has to pay interest to someone else, and will be obliged to return the sum borrowed to the lender. A nation which is in debt has to pay interest to its own citizens (a foreign debt is a different story and is much more like a private debt). That is to say, the :33
9.いくつかの誤a
1.「財務ビュー」
大不況の間、政府の投資は雇用を増やすことができないという公式見解でした。議論は続いた。いつでも一定量の貯蓄が行われており、政府がより多くの貯蓄を投資すると、民間企業が利用できる貯金は少なくなる。彼は、より多くの投資があれば、より高いレベルの活動と収入があり、その結果、より多くの貯蓄があるという事実を見落としている。この議論は非常に幼稚であるため、それを信じる強い希望を持っていなかった人をだますことはありません。それにもかかわらず、それは長年にわたり政府の政策の基礎であり、1929年に有名な白書で述べられました。
1956年には大著 The Accumulation of Capital を著した。これはケインズ理論を拡張して、長期的な成長と資本蓄積の問題を扱えるようにしたものだ。さらに成長理論についてのもっと詳細な検討 (1962) も行い、カンタブリッジ派の同志たるニコラス・カルドアと協力して各種「黄金時代」の成長経路（黄金速も含む）の考え方の基盤が提示された。二人は後に「ケンブリッジ派成長理論」と呼ばれるものを共同で開発した。
資本に関する彼女の研究は、資本蓄積から生じる問題の検討 (1954) で始まり、Accumulation of Capital (1956) での "Ruth Cohen Curiosum" 検討がそれに続いた。スラッファ (1960) とロビンソンを基盤として ネオリカード派の「古典派復興」は一大騒動を引き起こした——これがケンブリッジ資本論争で、彼女はアメリカのネオケインズ派に対するケンブリッジの攻撃で先鋒となった
Joan Robinson on the orthodox theory of profit, 1942. Gosh, this woman is so good! Her writings inspire anyone who wants economics to do better… @alexxdouglas @angusarmstrong8
Joan Robinson on the orthodox theory of profit, 1942. Gosh, this woman is so good! Her writings inspire anyone who wants economics to do better… @alexxdouglas @angusarmstrong8
The orthodox economists have been much preoccupied with elegant elaboration of minor problems.… Marx’s intellectual tools are far cruder, but his sense of reality is far stronger. Robinson ([1942] 1966b)
Robinson was inspired by the conviction of Marx (and Keynes) that capitalism was run by capitalists and not consumers, which meant profit-making and accumulation were central goa…
Robinson (1955, p. 71) wrote:
Marx’s analysis of capitalism shows its strong points, although his purpose was to attack it. Marshall’s argument inadvertently shows the wastefulness of capitalism, although he meant to recommend it. Keynes in showing the need for remedies to the defects of capitalism also shows how dangerous the remedies may be.
In my view, Robinson examined Marx as one would approach any object of study, pointing out weaknesses and coming up with constructive criticisms while also acknowledging its strengths. She was interested in the progress of economic theory not in the abstract sense, but rather in terms of whether that theory was able to account for actual economic phenomena. I would not call Robinson a Marxist more than I would call her a Keynesian, or a member of any other school of thought. She was an original thinker who craved a better economics and was willing to look everywhere for the tools to build one.
Robinson, Joan. 1966b. An Essay on Marxian Economics. 2nd ed. New York: Macmillan, 1942.
Robinson, Joan. 1955. “Marx, Marshall and Keynes.” In Contributions to Modern Economics. New York: Academic Press, 1978.
Journal of Economics 1982, 6, 295-296 NOTE Shedding darkness Joan Robinson* (reviewing: Axel Leijonhufvud, Information and Coordination. Essays in Macroeconomic Theory, Oxford University Press, 1981) When Michal Kalecki was in London, soon after the publication of Keynes' General Theory, Richard Kahn and I had a date to meet him at a restaurant. We arrived first, and as Michal came over to the table where we were sitting he announced 'I have found out what economics is; it is the science of confusing stocks with flows'. It is this confusion that has kept the Quantity Theory of Money alive until today. By applying V, velocity of circulation, that is turnover say per week or per year, to M, the stock of money used in transactions in a given market, we arrive at the flow of transactions in the market concerned. So what? Neither M nor Vis an independent causal factor determining or limiting the level of prices or of output but merely an element in the mechanism that relates one to another ystery about the quantity formula. MV is the flow of transactions per unit of time in terms of whatever currency is used for these transactions, but what is the unit There is another m represented by MV/P-transactions in 'real' terms? Professor Leijonhufvud has never understood Kalecki's point so that his monetary theory is both confused and confusing. After his On Keynesian Economics and the Economics of Keynes he produced a number of papers which are here collected with the addition of a long new essay. When I reviewed the earlier book I purported to find some sense in it (which surprised some of my colleagues) but this time I am quite defeated. The arguments all seem to be chopped up into short lengths, then stirred together as though to make soup. The analysis purports to deal with a world of growth with 'complete information' apparently about the future as well as the present situation in an economy. Certain authors', which include me, argue that 'a realistic appreciation of the role of ignorance in the human condition must preclude the use of equilibrium models. However this may be, this paper cannot do without it' (p. 137). But what can it do with it? Leijonhufvud makes a heavy attack on the liquidity preference version of the theory of the rate of interest based on supply and demand of money, which he believes to be an essential element in Keynes' theory Keynes in writing the General Theory evidently could not bring himself to discard the quantity of money altogether from his system and found a niche for it in the theory of the rate of interest * University of 0309-166X/82/030295 +02 803.00/0 D 1982 Academic Press Inc. (London) Limited
Both referees referred to Joan Robinson (1953–54, p. 86, n. 1), recording Abba Lerner’s quip about eliminating the market for peanuts—a quip notoriously difficult to trace (one of us found it once but hasn’t been able to do so again, nor could they). Leaving out the market for peanuts might be acceptable, but Hicks was dealing with aggregates; leaving out the market for goods is leaving out the real economy. 16 For example, Alan Coddington, whose work was in turn influential, was somehow persuaded by it (Coddington, 1983, p. 74 ff.). 17 Recall that only purchases of new issues are loans. 18 Why dea
2014 Whatever happened to Keynes’s monetary theory? Victoria Chick and Geoff Tily* Some see a re
6:01 午後 削除 Blogger yoji さんは書きました... Robinson, J. 1953–54. The production function and the theory of capital, Review of Economic Studies, vol. 21, 81–106 Samuelson, P.
6:01 午後 削除 Blogger yoji さんは書きました... 松嶋敦茂教授退職記念論文集(第356号) 72 参考文献 Bhaduri, A. and Robinson, J. (1980)Accumulation and Exploitation: Analysis in the Tradi tion of Marx, Sraffa and Kalecki, Cambridge Journal of Economics, 4:103-15. HicksJ. (1974) Capital Controversies : Ancient and modern, American Economic Review 64:307-16 平野嘉孝(2002)「経済システムの自己増殖」吉田和男編著「複雜系経済学へのアプローチ」 東洋経済新報社 89~106頁に第5章として所収。 Kahn,R.F. and Champernowne,D.G. (1953-4)The value of invested capital, Review of Eco nomic Studies,21(2):107-11. Kurz, H. and N.Salvadori (2002)'On the long-period method: a comment on Ravagnani' in Is There Progress in Economics?, edited by S. Boehm, C. Gehrke, H. D. Kurz and R. Sturn, Cheltenham (UK), Edward Elgar 松嶋敦茂(1996)「現代経済学史1870~1970」名古屋大学出版会。 Ricardo, D. (1821)The Works and Correspondence of David Ricardo, edited by P. Sraffa with the Collaboration of M.H. Dobb,1951,vol. 1 ,pp.447, ( よび課税の原理」,上.下,岩波文庫,1987年) E,
Robinson,J. (1953-54) The production function and the theory of capital, Review of Econom ic Studies,21 (2):31-106.(「生產関数と資本理論」山田克已訳「資本理論とケインズ経済 学」所収,日本経済評論社,1988年) ,J.&J.1 - hJ,(1976) Tft R Schefold, B. (1989). Mr. Sraffa on Joint Production and Other Essays. London: Unwin Hy man. Sraffa, P. (1960). Production of Commodities by Means of Commodities. Cambridge Univer- sity Press.(菱山泉,山下博訳「商品による商品の生產」,有斐閣,1962年) Wicksell, K. (1901) Lectures on Political Economy,vol. I. General Theory, translated by E Classen and edited with an introduction by L. Robbins, (reprint ed.) 1967, (A R, 「経済学講義I」日本経済評論社,1984年)
99 "Economy 66 (2) The National Government which was formed in 1931 went in for a great economy campaign. Local authorities were compelled to cease work on building schemes, roads, fen drainage and so forth. An emergency budget was introduced, increasing taxation, cutting unemployment allowances and reducing the pay of public servants, such as teachers and the armed forces. Private citizens felt it was patriotic to spend less. Some Cambridge Colleges gave up their traditional feasts as a recognition of the crisis. increase unemployment and make the economic situation of the country still more depressed. Nowadays there is considerably more understanding of how things work, even among Treasury officials, and it is unlikely that such a completely idiotic policy will be tried again. All this helped to
99 "Economy 66 (2) The National Government which was formed in 1931 went in for a great economy campaign. Local authorities were compelled to cease work on building schemes, roads, fen drainage and so forth. An emergency budget was introduced, increasing taxation, cutting unemployment allowances and reducing the pay of public servants, such as teachers and the armed forces. Private citizens felt it was patriotic to spend less. Some Cambridge Colleges gave up their traditional feasts as a recognition of the crisis. All this helped to increase unemployment and make the economic situation of the country still more depressed. Nowadays there is considerably more understanding of how things work, even among Treasury officials, and it is unlikely that such a completely idiotic policy will be tried again.
前表紙 Joan Robinson, Workers' Educational Association, Workers' Educational Trade Union Committee The Workers' Educational Assoc., and the Workers' Trade Union Committee, 1949 - 36 ページ
Stephanie Kelton (@StephanieKelton) 2020/01/13 7:46 Joan Robinson (1943) on the “logic” of austerity. pic.twitter.com/aRooHKEXqh
6:23 午後 削除 Blogger yoji さんは書きました... 99 "Economy 66 (2) The National Government which was formed in 1931 went in for a great economy campaign. Local authorities were compelled to cease work on building schemes, roads, fen drainage and so forth. An emergency budget was introduced, increasing taxation, cutting unemployment allowances and reducing the pay of public servants, such as teachers and the armed forces. Private citizens felt it was patriotic to spend less. Some Cambridge Colleges gave up their traditional feasts as a recognition of the crisis. All this helped to increase unemployment and make the economic situation of the country still more depressed. Nowadays there is considerably more understanding of how things work, even among Treasury officials, and it is unlikely that such a completely idiotic policy will be tried again.
The Trade Cycle The Trade Cycle. By R. F. Harrod. (Oxford University Press. 1936. Pp. 248. 10s.) Joan Robinson The Economic Journal, Volume 46, Issue 184, 1 December 1936, Pages 691–693, https://doi.org/10.2307/2224679 Published: 01 December 1936 Cite Permissions Icon Permissions Share Issue Section: Reviews
Keynes, Uncertainty and the Global Economy 2002 https://www.postkeynesian.net/downloads/Publications/KeynesUncertainty%20BK2.pdf 33/ 329 Keynes’s ‘microeconomics’: some lessons 19 Piero V. Mini
ケインズ、不確実性と世界経済 2002 ケインズの「ミクロ経済学」：いくつかの教訓 19 ピエロ・V・ミニ II KEYNES AND THE BELOW-CAPACITY THEOREM
Kalecki’s paper attempted to extend the General Theory beyond the short run. Keynes’s original reaction to it was that it was ‘high, almost delirious nonsense’.Hefelt that thereweremany ‘latent and tacit’assumptions, a combination of which might well explain his conclusions. But were the assumptions realistic? Keynes suspected that the whole deductive method was ‘carried to ludicrous lengths’, as, for instance, in the assumption that ‘all firms are alwaysworking belowcapacity’, even in the long run(CWXII: 829). Joan Robinson, to whom Keynes had appealed for an opinion, rose in defence of Kalecki. After attempting to clarify what he might have meant, she says, ‘As for under-capacity working – that is part of the usual bag of tricks of Imperfect Competition theory’ (ibid.: 830). In his reply, Keynes proclaimed himself ‘still innocent enough to be bewildered by the idea’ of firms always working below capacity. He suspected that the theorem was the result of ‘esoteric abracadabra’, and that Kalecki used ‘artificial assumptions which have no possible relation to reality or any other merit except that they happen to lead up to a needed result’ (ibid.: 831). Robinson protested at Keynes calling imperfect competition ‘an esoteric doctrine’. After providing Keynes with the familiar diagram ‘proving’ the theorem, she added, ‘It may be awful rot – as you have always suspected – but for better or worse it is in all the text books now.’Keynes’s subsequent letter ignored Robinson’s point about the popularity of the theorem, and...
Keynes on Micro-Economics - Clute Journals clutejournals.com › article › download PDFこのページを訳す He suspected that the theorem was the result of. ―esoteric abracadabra,‖ and that Kalecki used ―artificial assumptions which have no possible relation to reality or any other merit except that they happen to lead up to a needed result.‖3.
3 Keynes, The Collected Writings (henceforth, CW) XII, 831 (12 February 1941)
Don't Chase After Surpluses SURPLIS The National Government which was formed in 1931 went iu for a great economy campaign. Local authorities were compelled to cease work on building schemes, roads, fen drainage and so forth. An emergency budget was introduced, increasing taxation, cutting unemployment allowances and reducing the pay of public servants, such as teachers and the armed forces. patriotic to spend less. Some Cambridge Colleges gave up their traditional feasts as a recognition of the crisis. All this helped to increase unemployment and make the economic situation of the country still more depressed. Nowadays there is considerably more understanding of how things work, even among Treasury officials, and it is unlikely that such a completely idiotic policy will be tried again. Private citizens felt it was ERSITY mou ELAIDEHE ECONOMY
The Reconstruction of Political Economy: An Introduction to ... books.google.co.jp › books
An Introduction to Post-Keynesian Economics J. A. Kregel. 81 . Joan Robinson , On Re - Reading Marx , reprinted in ( 95 ) . 82 . Joan Robinson , " The Production Function and the Theory of Capital ' , reprinted in [ 84 ) . 83 . Joan Robinson ... J. A. Kregel · 1975 · スニペット表示 · 他の版
【購入前の注意点】 この商品は "Reader™" ではお読みいただけません。 電子書籍の閲覧には「Kinoppy for iOS」が必要です。「Kinoppy for iOS」は App Store からダウンロード下さい。 ご利用の環境によっては、「Kinoppy for iOS」が動作しない可能性があります。事前にインストールして動作することをご確認ください。 ご購入が完了すると、自動的に Kinoppy の本棚に電子書籍が入ります。自動で入らない場合は、『手動同期』を実行してください。 電子書籍の購入時にポイントはつきますか? https://faq.kinokuniya.co.jp/faq/show/155
Seeing Capital in the light of the Keynesian revolution, I found much in it that the professed Marxist seemed to have overlooked. They had replied to Keynes with the slogans of sound finance and the gold standard. Only Kalecki had seen the point of the schema of expanded reproduction in Volume II of Canital and he had built
petition into line with the analysis of effective demand and laid the basis for what is nowadays called the Cambridge' theory of distribution. In 1940, as a distraction from the news, I began to read Marx.
1956年には大著 The Accumulation of Capital 資本蓄積論を著した。これはケインズ理論を拡張して、長期的な成長と資本蓄積の問題を扱えるようにしたものだ。さらに成長理論についてのもっと詳細な検討 (1962) も行い、カンタブリッジ派の同志たるニコラス・カルドアと協力して各種「黄金時代」の成長経路（黄金速も含む）の考え方の基盤が提示された。二人は後に「ケンブリッジ派成長理論」と呼ばれるものを共同で開発した。 資本に関する彼女の研究は、資本蓄積から生じる問題の検討 (1954) で始まり、Accumulation of Capital (1956) での "Ruth Cohen Curiosum" 検討がそれに続いた。スラッファ (1960) とロビンソンを基盤として ネオリカード派の「古典派復興」は一大騒動を引き起こした——これがケンブリッジ資本論争で、彼女はアメリカのネオケインズ派に対するケンブリッジの攻撃で先鋒となった
Retrospectives Joan Robinson on Karl Marx: “His Sense of Reality Is Far Stronger” Carolina Alves
https://twitter.com/cacrisalves?s=21
The orthodox economists have been much preoccupied with elegant elaboration of minor problems.… Marx’s intellectual tools are far cruder, but his sense of reality is far stronger. Robinson ([1942] 1966b)
Robinson was inspired by the conviction of Marx (and Keynes) that capitalism was run by capitalists and not consumers, which meant profit-making and accumulation were central goa…
Robinson (1955, p. 71) wrote:
Marx’s analysis of capitalism shows its strong points, although his purpose was to attack it. Marshall’s argument inadvertently shows the wastefulness of capitalism, although he meant to recommend it. Keynes in showing the need for remedies to the defects of capitalism also shows how dangerous the remedies may be.
In my view, Robinson examined Marx as one would approach any object of study, pointing out weaknesses and coming up with constructive criticisms while also acknowledging its strengths. She was interested in the progress of economic theory not in the abstract sense, but rather in terms of whether that theory was able to account for actual economic phenomena. I would not call Robinson a Marxist more than I would call her a Keynesian, or a member of any other school of thought. She was an original thinker who craved a better economics and was willing to look everywhere for the tools to build one.
Robinson, Joan. 1966b. An Essay on Marxian Economics. 2nd ed. New York: Macmillan, 1942. Robinson, Joan. 1955. “Marx, Marshall and Keynes.” In Contributions to Modern Economics. New York: Academic Press, 1978.
Robinson, Joan. 1966b. An Essay on Marxian Economics. 2nd ed. New York: Macmillan, 1942. Robinson, Joan. 1955. "Marx, Marshall and Keynes.". 現代経済学への貢献』（Contributions to Modern Economics. New York: Academic Press, 1978.
@profsandyoliver @DoughnutEcon @KateRaworth "The purpose of studying economics is not to acquire a set of ready-made answers to economic questions, but to learn how to avoid being deceived by economists.” (Joan Robinson) Not by Kate, of course. By those other economists who wrote the old text-books.
"The purpose of studying economics is not to acquire a set of ready-made answers to economic questions, but to learn how to avoid being deceived by economists.” Joan Robinson
concertedaction.com/2014/01/30/joa… "The purpose of studying economics is not to acquire a set of ready-made answers to economic questions, but to learn how to avoid being deceived by economists." Delhi School of Economics as Occasional Paper No.9収録のMarx, Marshall And Keynes(1955)らしい
"The purpose of studying economics is not to acquire a set of ready-made answers to economic questions, but to learn how to avoid being deceived by economists.” Joan Robinson
Delhi School of Economics as Occasional Paper No.9収録のMarx, Marshall And Keynes(1955)
Today in the rigorous, precise and non-ideological world of [actual] econ, we have Tyler Cowen enlightening us that Joan Robinson didn't know actual econ, was an uncritical leftie, had one truly major contribution & then really bad stuff.
1978Fasc. 1, 5-20 THE ORGANIC COMPOSITION OF CAPITAL JOAN ROBINSON* 「資本の有機的構成」という概念は、マルクス分析の重要な要素である。利益率低下論との関連から、新古典派の「資本と労働の比率」という概念に類似していると考えられてきたが、後者がSRAFFAの批判によって粉砕されているので*、同じ観点から前者を再調査する必要がある。I MARXが形式的な分析を行った際の表記は、非常に分かりにくいものであった。例えば、1週間あるいは1年間の生産の流れを価値で表すと、c+v+s、すなわち、既存の生産手段、賃金、剰余金のストックの減少の価値で表される。
1 / 16 - 201% + 8 KYKLOS, Vol. 31 - 1978- Fasc. 1, 5-20 THE ORGANIC COMPOSITION OF CAPITAL JOAN ROBINSON* The concept of 'the organic composition of capital' is an important element in Marxian analysis; because of its connection with a theory of a falling rate of profit, it has been taken to resemble the neoclassical concept of 'the ratio of capital to labour' and since the latter has been pulverised by SRAFFA's critique¹ it is necessary to re-examine the former in the same light. I The notation in which MARX set out his formal analysis is very con- fusing. A flow of production, say per week or per year, in terms of value is expressed as c+v+s, that is, the values of the depletion in the pre-existing stock of means of production, of wages and of surplus.
資本の価値構成[編集] 資本における生産手段を購入する不変資本と労働力を購入する可変資本の比率で表現する資本の構成。すなわち資本の価値構成は不変資本を C C、可変資本を V Vとおけば C V {\displaystyle {\frac {C}{V}}}と示すことができる。この比率が高まれば資本の価値構成が高度化したことを意味し、価値そのものに注目した視点であるといえる。
資本構成には使用価値的側面から見た資本の技術的構成と、価値的側面から見た資本の価値構成の二面性がある。 資本の有機的構成は C V {\displaystyle {\frac {C}{V}}}で表される。 上記の C V {\displaystyle {\frac {C}{V}}}の比率が高まれば、資本の有機的構成が高度化したことを意味する。
ジョーン・ロビンソン（Joan Violet Robinson、1903 - 1983）
http://nam-students.blogspot.com/2018/09/blog-post_14.html@
In 1940, as a distraction from the news, I began to read Marx.
Seeing Capital in the light of the Keynesian revolution, I found
much in it that the professed Marxist seemed to have overlooked.
They had replied to Keynes with the slogans of sound finance and
the gold standard. Only Kalecki had seen the point of the schema
of expanded reproduction in Volume II of Capital and he had built
a 'Keynesian' theory on them. For me, the main message of Marx
was the need to think in terms of history, not of equilibrium. This,
of course, was the message of the Keynesian revolution too, but I
had applied it only in short-period terms. I had been so much under
the influence of Pigou's methodology that I had written a 'Long-
period Theory of Employment' in terms of comparisons of stationary
states with different rates of interest. Now I began to catch a glimpse
of an approach that would emancipate us from the dominance of
equilibrium analysis.
As for the labour theory of value, I could not make out what the
fuss was about. It seemed obvious that the transformation problem,
that is, finding a system of prices yielding a uniform rate of profit
for all capitalists, was just a puzzle (though it was not solved till
Sraffa showed the way). Nothing of importance could turn on it.
…
1940年に,〔戦争に明け暮れる] ニュースからの気晴らしのつもりで,わた
しはマルクス (Karl Marx, 1818 ~ 83) を読み始めた。ケインズ革命の光に照
らして『資本論』を読むことによって,わたしはマルクス主義者を自認してい
る人々が見過ごしてきたように思われる多くのものをそのなかに見いだした。
マルクス主義者は健全財政と金本位制のスローガンをもってケインズに応酬し
ていた。そのなかでカレッキーだけが『資本論』第II巻の拡大再生産表式の要
点を理解していて,その基礎のうえに「ケインズ的」理論をうち建てたのであ
る。わたしにとってマルクスの主要な教示は,均衡の見地からではなく歴史の
見地から思考しなければいけないということであった。このことは,もちろん
ケインズ革命の教示でもあった。
…
（クリーゲル政治経済学の再構築1978^1973？年3頁）
参考：
Stephanie Kelton (@StephanieKelton)
2020/01/13 7:46
Joan Robinson (1943) on the “logic” of austerity. pic.twitter.com/aRooHKEXqh
https://twitter.com/stephaniekelton/status/1216491689218641922?s=21
1945完全雇用の問題
"The Economics of Full Employment", 1945, EJ.
https://cpb-us-e1.wpmucdn.com/blogs.roosevelt.edu/dist/f/76/files/2012/12/Robinson-on-the-Problem-of-Full-Employment.pdf
p.33
9. some Fallacies
1. “the treasury view”
During the great slump it was the official view that Government investment cannot increase employment. The argument ran: there is a certain amount of saving going on at any time, and if more savings are invested by the Government, less will be available for private enterprise. T his overlooks the fact that if there is more investment there will be a higher level of activity and of incomes and consequently more saving. T he argument is so childish that it would not deceive anyone who had not a strong wish to believe it. Nevertheless, it was for many years the basis of Government policy, and was set out in a famous White Paper in 1929.
2. “economy”
The National Government which was formed in 1931 went in for a great economy campaign. Local authorities were compelled to cease work on building schemes, roads, fen drainage, and so forth. An emergency budget was introduced, increasing taxation, cutting unemployment allowances and reducing the pay of public servants, such as teachers and the armed forces. Private citizens felt it was patriotic to spend less. Some Cambridge Colleges gave up their traditional feasts as a recognition of the crisis. All this helped to increase unemployment and make the economic situation of the country still more depressed. Nowadays there is considerably more understanding of how things work and it is unlikely that such a completely idiotic policy will be tried again.
3. the Burden oF the national debt The National Debt is often brought forward as an argument against public spending to create employment. There is a good deal of confusion between the National Debt and the debt of an individual. An individual who is in debt has to pay interest to someone else, and will be obliged to return the sum borrowed to the lender. A nation which is in debt has to pay interest to its own citizens (a foreign debt is a different story and is much more like a private debt). That is to say, the
:33
9.いくつかの誤a
1.「財務ビュー」
大不況の間、政府の投資は雇用を増やすことができないという公式見解でした。議論は続いた。いつでも一定量の貯蓄が行われており、政府がより多くの貯蓄を投資すると、民間企業が利用できる貯金は少なくなる。彼は、より多くの投資があれば、より高いレベルの活動と収入があり、その結果、より多くの貯蓄があるという事実を見落としている。この議論は非常に幼稚であるため、それを信じる強い希望を持っていなかった人をだますことはありません。それにもかかわらず、それは長年にわたり政府の政策の基礎であり、1929年に有名な白書で述べられました。
2.「経済」
1931年に設立された中央政府は、素晴らしい経済キャンペーンに参加しました。地方自治体は、建築計画、道路、フェン排水などの作業を中止せざるを得ませんでした。緊急予算が導入され、課税が増加し、失業手当が削減され、教師や軍隊などの公務員の給与が削減されました。一般市民は、支出を減らすことは愛国的だと感じていました。一部のケンブリッジ大学は、危機の認識として伝統的なf宴をあきらめました。これはすべて、失業率を高め、国の経済状況をさらに落ち込ませるのに役立ちました。最近では、物事の仕組みについてかなり理解が深まり、そのような完全にばかげたポリシーが再び試されることはほとんどありません。
3.国債の負担国債は、雇用を創出するための公的支出に対する議論としてしばしば提起されます。国債と個人の負債の間にはかなりの混乱があります。借金をしている個人は、他の誰かに利子を支払わなければならず、貸し手に借りた金額を返さなければなりません。借金を抱えている国は、自国民に利子を支払わなければなりません（対外債務は別の話であり、民間債務に非常に似ています）。つまり、
1944年雇用政策白書の意義と問題点
（経済学の系統図、リンク::::::::::）
http://nam-students.blogspot.com/2018/09/blog-post_87.html
http://nam-students.blogspot.jp/2015/10/michal-kalecki.html
ピエロ・スラッファ (Piero SRAFFA)／ルイジ・パシネッティ（Luigi L. Pasinetti）
http://nam-students.blogspot.jp/2015/10/piero-sraffa.html
http://nam-students.blogspot.com/2018/08/blog-post_17.html
┃ コース┃ 岩井克人
┃（北欧）ヴィクセル┓ ピグー┃
┃ ケインズ ┃ ニュー・
┃ ケインズ学派┻━ポスト・ケインジアン━ケインジアン
＊ ６ジョ ーン ・ロビンソン 「経済学の第二の危機 」 （一九七一年 ） 、 『資本理論とケインズ経済学 』山田克巳訳 （日本経済評論社 、一九八八年 ）所収 、三〇一 ～三一九ペ ージ参照 。
ケインズの愛弟子の一人に 、ジョーン ・ロビンソン （一九〇三 ～八三 ）というきわめて有能な女性の経済学者がいた 。彼女の初期の仕事は 、不完全競争理論を明確に定式化した 『不完全競争の経済学 』 （一九三三年 ）に代表されるが 、ケインズ革命を境に 、ケインズ理論の長期化または動学化 （ 『資本蓄積論 』一九五六年 ）へと進み 、晩年には 、 「左派ケインジアン 」とみずから名乗り 、 I S ／ L Mに代表される主流派のケインズ解釈に異議を唱える論客として活動した 。学問を評価する場合 、彼女が左翼であった事実はどうでもよいことである 。現在の標準的な経済学教科書をみれば明らかだが 、不完全競争理論の説明は必ずあるが 、後期ロビンソンの仕事についての記述は全くないといってよい 。もし経済学が自然科学に比肩しうる 「科学 」であるならば 、彼女の初期の業績に対して経済学賞を与えるべきだったのではないか 。不完全競争理論がなければ 、市場構造の理解が不十分になるばかりか 、ルーカス以後に登場した 、いわゆる 「ニュー ・ケインジアン 」によるマクロ経済学のミクロ的基礎付けの試みも成立しなくなってしまう 。彼女が経済学賞の選考から漏れたことは 、選考委員会が 「業績 」だけではなく 「人物 」 （とくに 、政治的立場 ）を勘案しているのではないかという疑いを抱かれるだけに残念至極といわなければならない 。
以上、根井物語現代経済学
＿＿＿＿＿＿
ジョーン・ロビンソン
利子率その他諸研究
邦訳1955
the rate of interest…
1952
194頁
１ カレッキー
カレツキー氏がケインズとは独立に『一般理論』を発見したことは、科学の暗合の最も優れた一例
であった。彼の分析の展開は直接に景気循環のモデルに導いた(ケインズはそうしなかった)。彼の理
論は短期均衡という同じ概念に基いていたから、おのずとケインズ体系に当てはまり、そうして『一
般理論』のその後の発展においてケインズ体系に吸収されるに至った。現在では人がいずれから何を
学んだかを区別することは不可能である。
とりわけ自覚している－－ この簡単な工夫によって、われわれは将来にたいして確信を抱いている人
人から「自由意志」を余儀なく奪うことなしに、(安定的な状態においては)やがて正しかったことが判明するに至る将来に対する確信について考えることができるのである。
(この項了)
ジョーン・ロビンソン (Joan Violet Robinson,) 1903-1983.
ジョーン・ロビンソン主要著作
ジョーン・ロビンソンに関するリソース
ジョーン・ロビンソン
サリー
ケンブリッジ
不完全競争理論
経済成長理論
受けた人物
ピエロ・スラッファ
ミハウ・カレツキ
与えた人物
ニコラス・カルドア
Amit Bhaduri
Zenobia Knakiewicz
Amoroso-Robinson relation