Journal Article A Note on Long-Run Unemployment Get access M. Kalecki M. Kalecki Lake Success, N.Y. Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar The Review of Economic Studies, Volume 18, Issue 1, 1950, Pages 62–64, https://doi.org/10.2307/2296106 Published: 01 January 1950

Journal Article A New Approach to the Problem of Business Cycles Get access M. Kalecki M. Kalecki United Nations , Lake Success Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar The Review of Economic Studies, Volume 16, Issue 2, 1949, Pages 57–64, https://doi.org/10.2307/2295715 Published: 01 January 1949

Journal Article The Work of Erwin Rothbarth Get access M. Kalecki M. Kalecki Montreal Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar The Review of Economic Studies, Volume 12, Issue 2, 1944, Pages 121–122, https://doi.org/10.2307/2296098 Published: 01 September 1944

Journal Article A Theorem on Technical Progress Get access M. Kalecki M. Kalecki Oxford Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar The Review of Economic Studies, Volume 8, Issue 3, June 1941, Pages 178–184, https://doi.org/10.2307/2967601 Published: 01 June 1941

The Supply Curve of an Industry under Imperfect Competition Get access M. Kalecki M. Kalecki Cambridge Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar The Review of Economic Studies, Volume 7, Issue 2, February 1940, Pages 91–112, https://doi.org/10.2307/2967473 Published: 01 February 1940

Journal Article A Theory of the Business Cycle Get access Michal Kalecki Michal Kalecki London Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar The Review of Economic Studies, Volume 4, Issue 2, February 1937, Pages 77–97, https://doi.org/10.2307/2967606 Published: 01 February 1937

1. IT WAS a great achievement of Gibrat2 to show that the distribution of the logarithms of some economic variates (for instance, the distribution of factories according to the number of workers) is approximately normal. The explanation of this phenomenon by Gibrat may be presented in a rigorous form as follows: Let us denote the variate X (for instance the number of workers in a factory) at a certain date by XO. Let us further assume that subsequently it undergoes a series of random independent proportionate changes mi, M2, *, mn, (Gibrat's loi de l'effet proportionnel).3 Thus at the end of the period in which these changes have taken place the value of the variate will have become XO(1+ml)(1M+m2) * (1 ++m,) and its natural logarithm=log Xo+log (1+ml)+log (1+m2)+ + +log (1 +mn). If we denote the deviation from the mean of log XO by Yo and the deviation from the mean of log (l+mk) by yk, the deviation from the mean of this expression becomes YO+yl+Y2+ +Yn. The absolute value of mk may be assumed small as compared with 1. It follows that the absolute value of log (1 +mk) and consequently that of yk is also small as compared with 1. As the second moment of yl+y2+ * +y. is equal to the sum of the second moments of Y1, Y2, * .., yn, it may be assumed that if n is sufficiently large the standard deviation of Yl+y2+ * +yn is equal to or greater than 1 (provided the standard deviation of yn does not fall below a certain level as n increases.) Thus yk is small as compared with the standard deviation of Yl+Y2+ +Yn. With this condition fulfilled the distribution of Yl+Y2+ +y,, is approximately normal (according to the Laplace-Liapounoff theorem4). Further if n is so large that the standard deviation of yl+y2+ + yn is large as compared with the standard deviation of Yo also, the distribution of Yo+yl+y2+ * * * +yn will not differ much from normality. Whatever the distribution of Y at the initial date, with the lapse of time it approaches normality more and more. 2. This argument is formally correct but it may be shown that its

CERTAIN questions have arisen' concerning my macrodynamic theory of business cycles2 which I consider of sufficient importance to warrant a detailed answer. I also wish to complete some parts of my original study which I think were presented too briefly. 1. Tinbergen makes the statement concerning my original article that, remarkably enough, prices do not appear at all in the theory.3 It can be easily shown that in reality my basic equation implies the dependence of investment activity on the ratio of prices to wages. My basic equation was4