Say's Law

Meacci, Ferdinando (2013): Say's Law. Forthcoming in:

Abstract

The expression “Say’s Law” is used in the economics literature to represent the arguments set out by Say in Chapter XV, Des Débouchés, Book I, of his Traité d’Economie Politique (1st ed. 1803; 4th ed. 1819, 1st English trans. 1821). These arguments, later known and discussed under the different names of “loi des débouchés” and “law of markets”, are considered by Ricardo amongst the “original, accurate, and profound” discussions of an author “who justly appreciated and applied the principles of Smith” (Works I: 6-7). Ever since Say’s exposition and Ricardo’s appreciation, the focus and controversies on this Law reached two distinct peaks first in the classical and then in the post-Keynesian period. While the classical period, which run between James Mill’s explicit draft of the Law (1965 [1808]) and J. S. Mill’s final qualification of it (1929 [1871]), reached its own peak in Ricardo’s outright support, against Malthus’ criticisms, of those arguments, the post-Keynesian period was opened by Keynes’ outright criticism of Ricardo’s system of thought (believed to be based on Say’s Law), and corresponding defence of Malthus, in his General Theory (CW VII: 18-21, 32-34, 364]). The different versions, interpretations and misunderstandings that have surrounded the Law in the course of time have been so numerous that an entire volume (be it one of those authored by Kates, 1998, Sowell, 1972, and Hutt, 1974; or the one edited by Kates, 2003) may not be enough to account for all of them. This holds even if the Law were looked at from the standpoint of a single author, be it Say or Ricardo, or of the interactions within, or between, the systems of thought of these or of many other authors. This entry is intended to single out, amongst these different versions, interpretations and misunderstandings, only those connected, directly or indirectly, with Ricardo’s support of the Law. Thus the entry is divided into 5 sections. Section 1 is focused on the limits of the Law from the standpoint of its pure or abstract content and on why it should be more properly referred to as Say’s Principle, while section 2 is focused on the split of the Law into its two forms known in the literature as “Say’s identity” and “Say’s equality”. The remaining three sections are instead devoted to an analysis of the main endorsements, criticisms and counter-criticisms that have surrounded the Law ever since Ricardo came to its support against Malthus, and until Keynes moved against it and, more generally, against Ricardo himself. Some brief conclusions are eventually provided in the final section. A draft of this paper has been submittted for publication in the Elgar Companion to David Ricardo, edited by H. Kurz and N. Salvadori, E. Elgar, forthcoming

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: Law of markets, Say's identity, Say's Equality
• Subjects: B - History of Economic Thought, Methodology, and Heterodox Approaches > B1 - History of Economic Thought through 1925; B - History of Economic Thought, Methodology, and Heterodox Approaches > B1 - History of Economic Thought through 1925 > B12 - Classical (includes Adam Smith); B - History of Economic Thought, Methodology, and Heterodox Approaches > B2 - History of Economic Thought since 1925; B - History of Economic Thought, Methodology, and Heterodox Approaches > B2 - History of Economic Thought since 1925 > B22 - Macroeconomics; B - History of Economic Thought, Methodology, and Heterodox Approaches > B3 - History of Economic Thought: Individuals

References

Baumol, W. (1977). Say’s (at Least) Eight Laws, or What Say and James Mill May Really Have Meant, Economica, 44:2, pp.145–61

Baumol, W. (1999). Retrospectives: Say’s Law, Journal of Economic Perspectives 13:1, pp.195 –204

Becker, G., and W. Baumol (1952). The Classical Monetary Theory, Economica, 19:4, pp.355–76

Clower, R. W. and A. Leijonhufvud (1984 [1973]). Say’s Principle, What It Means and Doesn’t Mean, in D.A. Walter (ed.), Money and Markets. Essays by Robert W. Clower, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp.145-165

Cottrell A. (1998). Keynes, Ricardo, Malthus and Say’s Law, in J. C. W. Ahiakpor (ed.), Keynes and the Classics Reconsidered, Dordrecht: Kluwer, pp.63-75

Eltis W. (2005). Money and General Gluts: The Analysis of Say. Malthus, and Ricardo, History of Political Economy, 37:4, pp.661-688

Garrison R. W. (1984). Time and money: The universals of macroeconomic theorizing, Journal of Macroeconomics, 6: 2, pp.197–213

Hicks, J. R. (1976). Some Questions of Time in Economics, in A. M. Tang, F. M. Westfield, and J. S. Worley (eds), Evolution, Welfare, and Time in Economics. Lexington MA: Lexington Books, pp. 135-51

Hollander, S. (1979). The Economics of David Ricardo, Toronto: University of Toronto Press

Hollander, S. (1997). The Economics of Thomas Robert Malthus, Toronto: University of Toronto Press

Hollander, S. (2005). Jean-Baptist Say and the Classical Canon in Economics, London: Routledge

Hutt W. H. (1974). A Rehabilitation of Say’s Law, Athens: Ohio University Press

Jonsson P. O. (1995). On the Economics of Say and Keynes’s Interpretation of Say’s Law, Eastern Economic Journal, 21, pp.147-155

Jonsson P. O. (1997). On Gluts, effective Demand, and the True Meaning of Say’s Law, Eastern Economic Journal, 23:2, pp.203-218

Kates S. (1997). On the true meaning of Say’s law, Eastern Economic Journal, 23:2, pp.191-203

Kates S. (1998). Say’s Law and the Keynesian Revolution: How Macroeconomic Theory Lost its Way, Cheltenham: E. Elgar

Kates S. (ed.) (2003). Two Hundred Years of Say’s Law. Essays on Economic Theory’s Most Controversial Principle, Cheltenham: E. Elgar

Kates S. (2005). ’Supply Creates its Own Demand’: A Discussion of the Origins of the Phrase and of its Adequacy as an Interpretation of Say’s Law of Markets, History of Economics Review, 41, pp.49-60

Keynes J. M. (1973). The Collected Writings of John Maynard Keynes, edited by D. Moggridge, London: Macmillan, 25 Vols

Lange, O. (1942). Say’s Law: A Restatement and Criticism, in O. Lange, F. McIntyre, and T. O. Matema (eds), Studies in Mathematical Economics and Econometrics: In Memory of Henry Schultz, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 49–68

Malthus T. R. (1986). The Works of Thomas Robert Malthus, edited by E. A. Wrigley and D. Souden, London: Pickering, 8 Vols

Meacci F. (2006). The competition-of-capitals doctrine and the wage-profit relationship, in N. Salvadori (ed.), Economic Growth and Distribution: On the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, Cheltenham: E. Elgar, pp.58-74

Meacci F. (2014). From bounties on exportation to the natural and market price of labour: Smith versus Ricardo, The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, forthcoming, pp. 1-29

Mill J. (1965 [1808]). Commerce Defended, New York: A :M: Kelley

Mill J. S. (1929 [1871]). Principles of political economy with some of their applications to social philosophy, edited by W. J. Ashley, London: Longmans

Peach T. (1993). Interpreting Ricardo, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Say, J.-B. (1821), A Treatise on Political Economy, or the Production, Distribution, and Consumption of Wealth, translated by C. R. Prinsep on the fourth (1819) French edition, Boston: Wells and Lilly

Schumpeter J. A. (1954). History of Economic Analysis, London: Routledge

Skinner A. S. (1967). Say’s Law: Origins and Content, Economica, 34:134, pp.153-66

Smith A. (1976 [1776]). An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, edited by R. H. Campbell and A. S. Skinner, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2 Vols

Sowell T. (1972). Say’s Law: An Historical Analysis. Princeton: Princeton University Press

Thweatt, W. O., (1979). Early Formulators of Say's Law, Quarterly Review of Economics and Business, 19:4, pp.79-96

Torrens R. (1966 [1821]). An Essay on the Production of Wealth, New York: A. M. Kelley