MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411327727 · doi:10.1080/09538259.2025.2495711

Distributional Regimes in the US — The Pasinetti Index and the Monetary Policy Effects on Income Distribution

2025· article· en· W4411327727 on OpenAlexaff
Pedro Clavijo-Cortes, Sylvio Antonio Kappes, Louis‐Philippe Rochon

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of Political Economy · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic Theory and Policy
Canadian institutionsLaurentian University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomicsIndex (typography)Distribution (mathematics)Income distributionMonetary policyMacroeconomicsEconometricsMonetary economicsKeynesian economicsInequality

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Policymakers and mainstream economists have expressed concerns over the distributional impacts of monetary policy following the emergence of so-called Unconventional Monetary Policies after the subprime crisis. This topic, however, is not new for post-Keynesianism. This paper focuses on the post-Keynesian idea of the Pasinetti Index. After an incursion into the history of this idea, the paper presents an econometric analysis of the relationship between the index, functional income distribution, and aggregate demand for the US from 1968 to 2022, using a threshold vector autoregressive model. The results indicate that the US economy has experienced different distributive regimes associated with changes in monetary policy. As a result, the economy has shifted from the Keynesian era to a more uncertain period, in which monetary policy is employed to protect the income and wealth of rentiers. Moreover, the work also shows that switches to a rentier-biased regime are highly detrimental to aggregate demand and functional income distribution.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.855
Threshold uncertainty score0.407

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.241 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReview of Political EconomySame topicEconomic Theory and PolicyFrench-language works237,207