Detalhes bibliográficos
Ano de defesa: |
2008 |
Autor(a) principal: |
Andrada, Alexandre Flávio Silva
 |
Orientador(a): |
Silva, César Roberto Leite da |
Banca de defesa: |
Não Informado pela instituição |
Tipo de documento: |
Dissertação
|
Tipo de acesso: |
Acesso aberto |
Idioma: |
por |
Instituição de defesa: |
Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo
|
Programa de Pós-Graduação: |
Programa de Estudos Pós-Graduados em Economia Política
|
Departamento: |
Economia
|
País: |
BR
|
Palavras-chave em Português: |
|
Palavras-chave em Inglês: |
|
Área do conhecimento CNPq: |
|
Link de acesso: |
https://tede2.pucsp.br/handle/handle/9337
|
Resumo: |
The present work aims to provide a critique to the Walrasian approach in Macroeconomics. The debate between Keynesians (Keynes, New Keynesians and Post-Keynesians) and Neoclassical (Monetarists and New Classical) about method, expectations, and equilibrium is presented. Trying so to refuse Lucas s critique, which says that Keynes did not respect economic analyze straightjacket , i.e., selfish agents and clear markets. About unemployment a critical revision of General Theory s second chapter is made as well the concepts of natural rate and involuntary unemployment. The conclusions are: do not seem that Friedman s instrumentalist approach is the correct referential to Macroeconomics, rational expectations hypothesis do not explain men effective behavior, continuous market clear is tautological, and involuntary unemployment referred to a foreign economic agent individual characteristics situation. It is a Macroeconomic unemployment. At last while Microeconomics can avoid historicists considerations, Macroeconomics can not. Macroeconomics issues are related to historical moment, stage of institutions development and to a more human economic agent behavior |