<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"> <HTML><HEAD> <META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1"> <META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2180" name=GENERATOR></HEAD> <BODY bottomMargin=0 leftMargin=3 topMargin=0 rightMargin=3> <DIV>Ted Winslow wrote:<BR><BR>> <I>What I should have said was that the results of the study reported <BR></I>> <I>on in the WSJ Rebello article forwarded by Doug were consistent with <BR></I>> <I>Keynes's liquidity preference theory.  The study doesn't, to say the <BR></I>> <I>least, interpret its results in terms  of this theory, so it's not a <BR></I>> <I>"return to Keynes" in this sense.<BR></I>><I><BR></I>> <I>The rationality postulate underpinning the view of financial markets <BR></I>> <I>that does actually dominate conventional economic analysis - the <BR></I>> <I>assumption of omniscient fully rational expectations - is very <BR></I>> <I>widespread.<BR></I><BR>I don't know if J. Barkley Rosser, Jr. is still signed on to the list, but his essay on the topic is here:</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Uncertainty and Expectations</DIV> <DIV>by  J. Barkley Rosser, Jr.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><A href="http://cob.jmu.edu/rosserjb/UNCRTEXP.ECT.doc">http://cob.jmu.edu/rosserjb/UNCRTEXP.ECT.doc</A></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>-- Shane</DIV> <DIV> </DIV></BODY></HTML>