Enhance Your Quote Experience
Enjoy ad-free browsing, unlimited collections, and advanced search features with Premium.
There were four years, 1931-1935, when I was myself a member of Hayek's seminar in London; it has left a deep mark on my thinking... At the end of th… - John Richard Hicks
" "There were four years, 1931-1935, when I was myself a member of Hayek's seminar in London; it has left a deep mark on my thinking... At the end of the discussions in that seminar … we were, I believe, on the point of taking what now seems to me to be a decisive step. I was, at least, on the point of taking it myself. There is evidence for that in my "Value and Capital", much of the groundwork for which was done before I left London.
English
Collect this quote
About John Richard Hicks
Sir John Richard Hicks (8 April 1904 – 20 May 1989) was a British economist, and economy professor at the and later the University of Oxford, who in 1972 received the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences (jointly with Kenneth Arrow) for his pioneering contributions to general equilibrium theory and welfare theory.
Also Known As
Native Name:
John Hicks
Alternative Names:
Sir John Richard Hicks
•
Sir John Hicks
•
Sir John Richards Hicks
Related quotes. More quotes will automatically load as you scroll down, or you can use the load more buttons.
Additional quotes by John Richard Hicks
The purpose of income calculations in practical affairs is to give people an indication of the amount which they can consume without impoverishing themselves. Following out this idea, it would seem that we ought to define a man's income as the maximum value which he can consume during a week, and still expect to be as well off at the end of the week as he was at the beginning.
I remember Robbins asking me if I could turn the Hayek model into mathematics... it began to dawn on me that... the model must be better specified. It was claimed that, if there were no monetary disturbance, the system would remain in 'equilibrium'. What could such an equilibrium mean? This, as it turned out, was a very deep question; I could do no more, in 1932, than make a start at answering it. I began by looking at what had been said by... Pareto and Wicksell. Their equilibrium was a static equilibrium, in which neither prices nor outputs were changing... That, clearly, would not do for Hayek. His 'equilibrium' must be progressive equilibrium, in which real wages, in particular, would be rising, so relative prices could not remain unchange … The next step in my thinking, was … equilibrium with perfect foresight. Investment of capital, to yield its fruit in the future, must be based on expectations, of opportunities in the future. When I put this to Hayek, he told me that this was indeed the direction in which he had been thinking. Hayek gave me a copy of a paper on 'intertemporal equilibrium', which he had written some years before his arrival in London; the conditions for a perfect foresight equilibrium were there set out in a very sophisticated manner.
Loading...