Tobin's Q is a pretty weak macro variable, although Keynes took it
seriously. Why isn't it Keynes' Q.
Anyway, I wrote a book about the subject:
Keynes, Investment Theory and the Economic Slowdown: The Role of
Replacement Investment and q Ratios (NY and London: St. Martin's and
Macmillan, 1989).
On Mar 12, 2009, at 11:29 AM, Jim Devine wrote:
is it right to think of "fictitious capital" as referring to cases
where Tobin's Q is greater than one? (One version of Q is
(stock-market valuation of real assets)/(actual value of those
assets), though Tobin uses the reproduction cost of those assets in
the denominator.)
--
Michael Perelman
Economics Department
California State University
Chico, CA
95929
530 898 5321
fax 530 898 5901
http://michaelperelman.wordpress.com
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
