Michael,
AS/AD is neither a necessary nor a sufficient
component of a textbook to make it "orthodox."
It is only a little over 20 years ago that AS/AD
entered the principles texts. We had orthodoxy
before that. Also, I do not see why AS/AD implies
either Say's Law or full employment or any other
ideologically predetermined outcome.
I note that the first people, after Keynes himself,
to use the terminology of aggregate supply and aggregate
demand were Paul Davidson and Eugene Smolensky in
their 1964 book, _Aggregate Supply and Demand Analysis_.
They followed the main Keynes version using Z-score functions
in a space of employment on the x-axis and revenue on the
y-axis. This, of course, resembles the "Keynesian cross,"
although not in its standard textbook Samuelsonian form.
It is not the same as the current AS/AD that has P on the y-axis.
But, as I have already noted, one can find that one in Chapter
21 of Keynes's _General Theory_.
Barkley Rosser
-----Original Message-----
From: Keaney Michael <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wednesday, August 30, 2000 2:30 AM
Subject: [PEN-L:964] intro macro text
>Peter Dorman wrote:
>
>Stretton's book is interesting but very idiosyncratic -- not suitable for
>the
>sort of course I want to teach. For me, there are two things I'm trying to
>accomplish, to improve student's understanding of how economies work, and
to
>increase their ability to critique mainstream economics as an intellectual
>and
>political force. That's why I'm happy to use an orthodox text, as long as
>it
>isn't too counterproductive pedagogically.
>
>MK writes: I'm not sure how Stretton does not fit your criteria. I read his
>book as trying to accomplish just those aims. And it would be a strange
>orthodoxy that dispensed with AS/AD, as you would wish it to do. Of course
>the content may be too broad in coverage for your purposes.
>
>In a recent RRPE John McDermott brought to attention Robert Guttmann's
>neglected "How Credit-Money Shapes the Economy" (M.E. Sharpe, 1994). While
>it's probably not at all what you are looking for, its treatment of money
as
>endogenous enables Guttmann to offer a very good economic history of the US
>to the present. It's a lot more convincing than most macro.
>
>Michael K.
>
>
