Talk:Pigou effect

?
It is not clear whether there is a difference between `wealth` and `real balances`. What it means with the term `real balances`?
 * "wealth" originally comes from micro view, then the "real balances" is more on the macro side, on the aggregate. 70.51.19.114 (talk) 22:54, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

The wealth effect is concept that is more fundamental and I believe older than the Pigou effect. When speaking of the wealth effect one need only have a single consumer and some form "wealth" as well as goods to demand. So long as demand changes for that single consumer whenever "wealth" changes, we have a meaningful wealth effect. 76.30.87.174 (talk) 19:51, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

"feel good" vs. "feel bad"
It will be good to mention the "feel good" relationship as "wealth effect" argued, and the "feel bad" relationship proposed by Abba Lerner. Jackzhp (talk) 22:55, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

The wealth effect and the pigou effect are two different things - the former is percieved wealth whereas the second is actual wealth, thus them erger sohould not take place — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.144.117.90 (talk) 20:20, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Proposal to merge Wealth effect into Pigou effect?
Paulfromatlanta (talk) 18:19, 13 September 2010 (UTC)If we want the highest technical accuracy then the articles should probably be merged. If we want more people to read and use the articles then Wealth Effect needs to stay separate since that is the common usage and what people will be looking for. There are Wiki guidelines for most things but this one is a judgment call.

MatchesMalone (talk) 14:46, 9 November 2010 (UTC) Agree with the above, however, to save space, maybe it might be better if one referenced the other on the same page.

LiquidOxide (talk) 19:31; 17 October 2011 (UTC) People will be looking for Wealth Effect, not Pigou effect. If the two are going to be merged, it should be merged under Wealth Effect.

Oppose any merger. This proposal (since March 2010) IMO should be rejected. The wealth effect includes the Pigou effect as a special case. Any change in wealth, not just from a change in the real value of money balances or government bonds, could change consumption expenditures. On this, see Darby (1987). "wealth effect," The New Palgrave: A Dictionary of Economics, v. 4, pp. 883-4. -- Thomasmeeks (talk) 14:16, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Hicks as "marginalizing" or "discrediting" Keynes?
I find no source for the article's claim that John Hicks was somehow trying to discredit Keynes or marginalize him w.r.t. "the classics." As far as I know, what one would be instructed in any economics course that covers such history, would be that Hicks was merely trying to bring together Keynes with everything that had come before.

If someone could either add a source to bolster/verify the claim that Hicks was somehow out to marginalize Keynes that would be great. Since the man basically created the IS-LM framework from which most Keynesian policy prescriptions are analyzed to this day by the likes of J Bradford DeLong and Paul Krugman. His statements about "classroom gadgets" could easily be referring to their inadequacy to perform the more advanced forecasting functions that were being developed at the time by econometricians.

In any case, someone please promptly provide a source or I will be around to... "lobby" (is it a euphemism? who knows?!)for the removal of the offending portion.

108.199.221.63 (talk) 10:08, 13 March 2012 (UTC)