. . . 1. Would Eisner have opposed the social protection fashioned by a younger post keynesian . . .
[mbs] Bob was against anything that smacked of protectionism and was not averse to saying so whenever he felt like it.
I don't see many self-identified as 'post-keynesian' supporting managed trade, protectionism, or the like.
RK: . . . Yet if the Treasury is working at cross purposes with the Fed by reducing deficit/debt>raising bond prices>lowering interest rates while the Fed is trying to cool the economy down with interest rate hikes, don't we have post keynesian theorists simply at war with themselves: raising the price of the dollar by calling for protection while advocating dollar devaluation as a way of increasing effective demand through stimulus of net exports?
[mbs] The Fed is certainly at war w/debt reduction if they jack up the short rates while debt goes down, giving rise to the fabled inverted yield curve. I'm not sure how protectionism raises the price of the dollar, or by how much, but the aim of managing trade is to reduce the advantages imports have over domestic output, so in principle one could do this and also reduce the value of the dollar. I think.
RK: Now my question is based on the Keynesian understanding of investment as Eisner collapses much govt-financed and -ordered production with capital accumulation carried out in the private sector. But it seems to me that by, say, building a road, the govt does not have in hand means of production with which labor can produce additional commodity product embodying surplus value, realized through the market. . . .
[mbs] Eisner's understanding of public investment is perfectly standard, as far as neo-classical econ goes. One of his contributions was the "Total System of Income Accounts (TSIA)," which laid out how to define and measure much that is left out of GDP but goes to a broader concept of economic welfare.
Public capital in Eisner is simply facilities that make possible a future stream of benefits (not necessarily in money form). Like a public swimming pool. He might have something to say about intangible capital, like skills or scientific discovery. You'd have to check his book on the TSIA.
He supported public investment simply because he was a liberal who believed in an ample public sector. I don't think it had much to do with his framework for macro/stabilization policy.
mbs