A two-class economy from the multi-sectoral perspective: the controversy between Pasinetti and Meade-Hahn-Samuelson-Modigliani revisited
A two-class economy from the multi-sectoral perspective: the controversy between Pasinetti and Meade-Hahn-Samuelson-Modigliani revisited
复制标题
多部门视角下的两级经济：帕西内蒂与米德-哈恩-萨缪尔森-莫迪利亚尼之间的争议重温
DOI：
10.1007/s40844-021-00202-8
复制
发表时间：
2022
影响因子：
0.9
通讯作者：
Kurose Kazuhiro
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Yusufcan Masatlioglu;Daisuke Nakajima;and Emre Ozdenoren;Kiyohisa Shibai;Kiyohisa Shibai;Kurose Kazuhiro
我们以资本家和工人为微观基础，研究帕西内特式的多部门二阶级模型。本研究假设的微观基础是一个无限生命的智能体，并且是一个行为遵循重叠代模型的智能体。我们考虑资本家和工人的微观基础的两种组合：一种是资本家和工人都充当无限寿命的代理人，另一种是资本家充当无限寿命的代理人，而工人则充当重叠代模型。我们专门分析稳态，重点关注从帕西内蒂均衡到对偶均衡的均衡转换，反之亦然，以及资本理论中的悖论。帕西内蒂均衡中经济增长率与利润之间的关系与技术和微观基础的组合无关。对偶平衡中获得的关系取决于技术，并且根据微观基础的组合而有所不同。一个数值例子展示了均衡转换、收入分配和资本理论悖论的同步分析。结果表明，有必要重新考虑资本作为可再生产和异质商品捆绑的重要性，以构建分析收入和资本（财富）分配的替代模型，这是以资本为主要生产要素的标准新古典模型无法解释的。
We examine the Pasinettian multi-sectoral two-class model with a microfoundation of a capitalist and a worker. The microfoundation assumed in this study is an infinitely lived agent and an agent whose behaviour follows the overlapping generations model. We consider two combinations of the microfoundation of capitalists and workers: one is that both capitalists and workers act as infinitely lived agents and the other is that capitalists act as infinitely lived agents and workers act as in the overlapping generations model. We exclusively analyse the steady states and focus on the switches of equilibria from the Pasinetti equilibrium to the dual equilibrium and vice versa, together with the paradoxes in capital theory. The relationship between the rates of economic growth and profit obtained in Pasinetti equilibrium is independent of technology and the combination of the microfoundation. The relationship obtained in dual equilibrium is dependent on technology and differs, depending on the combination of microfoundation. A numerical example shows the simultaneous analysis of the switch of equilibria, income distribution, and capital theory paradoxes. The result indicates that it is necessary to reconsider the importance of capital as a bundle of reproducible and heterogeneous commodities to construct an alternative model analysing the distribution of income and capital (wealth), which is unaccountable by the standard neo-classical models with capital as the primary factor of production.