Skip to main content
  • 73 Accesses

Abstract

Since Ricardo, one of the principal questions facing economists has been how to present a theory of income distribution. Ricardo (1817, p. 5) remarks on the historical fact that “in different stages of society, the proportions of the whole produce of the earth which will be allotted to each of these classes [the proprietor of the land, the owner of the stock or capital, and the laborers], under the name of rent, profit and wages will be essentially different.” He continues this theme by pointing out that “To determine the laws which regulate this distribution is the principal problem in political economy.”

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. The widow’s cruse is an allegorical expression regarding the determinants of profits. Refer to note 1 of Chapter 3 for details.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Sen (1963, p. 57) calls this the “General Theory” model of Keynesian income distribution. The same understanding is seen in Weintraub (1958), Atsumi (1960), Okamoto (1967), Yasui (1969), and others. Refer to note 1 of Chapter 4 for Sen’s argument.

    Google Scholar 

  3. See “Historical Constancies” in Chapter 3 for an argument relating to this matter.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Keynes himself maintains this first postulate as heretofore subject only to the same qualifications as in classical theory. This means that, “with a given organization, equipment and technique, real wages and the volume of output (and hence of employment) are uniquely correlated, so that, in general, then an increase in employment can only occur to the accompaniment of a decline in the rate of real wages” (1936, p. 17). Regarding my argument on this point, particularly in an underemployment economy, see “A Symmetrical Change in Productivity Growth” in Chapter 2 and assumption v and an explanation of equation (5) in Chapter 4.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Refer to note 11 in Chapter 3 for Kaldor’s argument on the marginal productivity principles.

    Google Scholar 

  6. We consider these two kinds of treatment are a fairly important. For an argument on nominal terms and gross terms, see notes 6 and 5 in Chapter 3, respectively. The reasons for these treatment are stated in Chapter 4.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1997 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Iyoda, M. (1997). Introduction. In: Profits, Wages, and Productivity in the Business Cycle. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-5376-8_1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-5376-8_1

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-94-010-6260-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-011-5376-8

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics