When Kevnes’ General Theory appeared, it was thought at first that this was the .book which would illuminate the problems of countries with surplus labour, since it assumed in unlimited supply of labour at the current price, and also, in its final pages, made a few remarks on secular economic expansion. Further reflection, however, revealed that Keynes’s book assumed not only that labour is unlimited in supply, but also, and more fundamentally, that land and capital are unlimited in supply-more fundamentally both in the short run sense that once the monetary tap is turned the real limit to expansion is not physical resources but the limited supply of labour, and also in the long run sense that secular expansion is embarrassed not by a shortage but by a superfluity of saving. Given the Keynesian remedies the neoclassical system comes into its own again. Hence, from the point of view of countries with surplus labour, Keynesianism is only a footnote to neoclassicism-albeit a long, important and fascinating footnote. The student of such economies has therefore to work right back to the classical economists before he finds an analytical framework into which he can relevantly fit his problems.

凯恩斯的《通论》被看作是第一本能够阐明劳动力增加的国家的问题的书，就在于其假设在当前价格下劳动力无限供给，并在书的最后几页，对长期经济增长做一些讨论。进一步地深究，可以揭露出凯恩斯的书不仅仅假设劳动力是无限供给的，并且更为根本的是，土地和资本都是无限供给的——这两点在短期中表现为一旦转动货币龙头，真正限制发展的不是物理资源而是有限的劳动供给，长期中表现为增长的窘困不是由于短缺而是因为储蓄过多。挽救凯恩斯主义的新古典系统再一次继承了这些。因此，来自劳动力增加的国家的观点，凯恩斯主义仅仅作为新古典主义的注解——尽管是既长、又重要而迷人的注解。因此，做这些经济理论的学者已经在他发现一个在其中可以吻合他的问题的系统之前，就复成为古典经济学家。