Uma revisão das controvérsias sobre a equação de Cambridge

Abstract

The objective of this article is to make a critical evaluation of the controversies about the Cambridge Equation both in the initial phase – when Pasinetti, Kaldor, Meade, Samuelson and Modigliani got involved – and in the second round that followed the publication of Steedman´s article, which contends that the Cambridge Equation still holds even in the case of a balanced government budget. In this setting we will argue that (i) the Meade-Samuelson-Modigliani theorem (MSM theorem) does not depend on specific hypotheses about the shape of the production function, being fully compatible with the problems of re-switching of techniques raised by the “Capital Controversy”, which are only relevant for the stability of the golden-age equilibrium growth path; (ii) the Pasinetti-Theorem is, however, more general than the MSM theorem since (a) it holds true even after the relaxation of some simplifying hypotheses of its original version, which does not occur with the MSM theorem, and (b) Kaldor´s version of the Pasinetti theorem holds true even in the case of the “euthanasia of capitalists”.