Answers for Steedman

Abstract

Within economics there are many different schools of thought, and such divisions also exist within post-Keynesian economics. These divergent ‘schools’ use different frameworks to examine different questions. The essence of Steedman’s paper is an attempt to contort one type of analysis into the framework of another. In other words, what he does is to incorporate Kaleckian analysis into a Sraffian framework, and then complain the fit is less than perfect.¹ Although there are problems within the Kaleckian framework which need to be addressed, they are not the ones identified by Steedman. Many of the issues he raises are simply nonissues within the Kaleckian framework, although they are clearly relevant problems within a Sraffian one.