Originally posted on March 23, 2014 at the New Economic Perspectives blog.
On March 21, 2014, Marc Lavoie of University of Ottawa presented a seminar on Heterodox and Post-Keynesian Economics at University of Missouri Kansas City. Prof. Lavoie graciously provided his slides and they available below the video.
3 RESPONSES TO “ESSENTIALS OF HETERODOX & POST-KEYNESIAN ECONOMICS”
- Brian | March 23, 2014 at 6:30 pm |To anyone at NEP, either contributor or commenter, I am looking to pursue a grad degree in Economics, but am torn between orthodox programs, or a Post-Keynesian one.This is new to me so I know little of the economic world, especially academia. Would pursuing Post-Keynes thought limit my chances, especially in terms of publishing and academia? Are there any mainstream institutions that have Post-Keynesian professors?Thanks again for the informative post
- Devin Smith | March 23, 2014 at 8:11 pm |From a student in UMKC’s PhD program…One thing to keep in mind when you are evaluating programs, typically heterodox are more pluralistic in approach and expose you to orthodox as well as heterodox approaches. One needs to understand both sides to argue viewpoints intelligently (know your enemy – haha). My experience prior to coming to UMKC was with an economics department within a college of business at a state school. The core classes that were required were standard fare neoclassical micro and mainstream macro (Mankiw and Blanchard) – it was a business school after all – while most electives were heterodox in nature. The faculty was split almost 50-50 between neoclassical/neoliberal and heterodox, which included Post-Keynesians, Institutionalists, Marxist and Feminist. All were well published and tenured.Being an older student that had been in the real world and lived through the dot com bust and the financial crisis, I took serious issue with neoclassical theory as it really has nothing to do with reality. Yes, it is listened to by policy makers (which may explain the mess) but to me as a former business person, totally unrealistic and most likely never going to be able to improve the lot of most people’s life. If you want to make a difference, my advice would be to pursue the heterodox path. That was why I chose UMKC’s program. (If you want to look, http://cas.umkc.edu/economics, look under graduate program/recent placements)If you look at Economists such as Randy Wray and Stephanie Kelton, they are well published and sought out as speakers all over the world. Kelton regularly appears on television. Wray teaches both at UMKC in MO and Bard College in NY. Marc Lavoie is at uOttowa and has held visiting positions at several universities both in Canada and Europe. So I would say that being Post-Keynesian would not limit your opportunities. There are more, but these 3 are the first to pop into my head. To a great extent, your opportunities are what you make of them and how hard you work at it.
- Brian | March 23, 2014 at 9:07 pm |Thank you.Yes, I’d like to make a difference…I’m from a non econ background, though I took several classes and the gap between classroom and reality did leave me pretty disillusioned. Especially since most of those classes were taken from 2008-2010, the disconnect from class to reality at the time was pretty massive! Post-Keynesian thought has been far more explanatory than anything else. I was concerned though about the “fight” of going at it from the outside, or if it was possible to work from within. Thankfully, I’m in Northern NJ so I’m not terribly far from Bard College, as well as a number of orthodox institutions.Seems there is no “better” way to go in particular, and taking a heterodox route need not limit me. Thanks again for the reply! Keep up the good work Devin.
- Devin Smith | March 23, 2014 at 8:11 pm |From a student in UMKC’s PhD program…One thing to keep in mind when you are evaluating programs, typically heterodox are more pluralistic in approach and expose you to orthodox as well as heterodox approaches. One needs to understand both sides to argue viewpoints intelligently (know your enemy – haha). My experience prior to coming to UMKC was with an economics department within a college of business at a state school. The core classes that were required were standard fare neoclassical micro and mainstream macro (Mankiw and Blanchard) – it was a business school after all – while most electives were heterodox in nature. The faculty was split almost 50-50 between neoclassical/neoliberal and heterodox, which included Post-Keynesians, Institutionalists, Marxist and Feminist. All were well published and tenured.Being an older student that had been in the real world and lived through the dot com bust and the financial crisis, I took serious issue with neoclassical theory as it really has nothing to do with reality. Yes, it is listened to by policy makers (which may explain the mess) but to me as a former business person, totally unrealistic and most likely never going to be able to improve the lot of most people’s life. If you want to make a difference, my advice would be to pursue the heterodox path. That was why I chose UMKC’s program. (If you want to look, http://cas.umkc.edu/economics, look under graduate program/recent placements)If you look at Economists such as Randy Wray and Stephanie Kelton, they are well published and sought out as speakers all over the world. Kelton regularly appears on television. Wray teaches both at UMKC in MO and Bard College in NY. Marc Lavoie is at uOttowa and has held visiting positions at several universities both in Canada and Europe. So I would say that being Post-Keynesian would not limit your opportunities. There are more, but these 3 are the first to pop into my head. To a great extent, your opportunities are what you make of them and how hard you work at it.