"It lets you both model inflation and attribute it sectorally—to wages, productivity, domestic debt saturation, and the external / tradables channel—within a consistent stock–flow, income‑distribution perspective."
Equation (K3) is the Kalecki distributional inflation equation: inflation depends on wage growth, productivity growth, and changes in the core profit share, scaled by the wage share 1−θ
Step 3 – Young’s claim‑dilution ratio
"meaning: excess credit over productive equity tends to raise the core profit share."
This is the closed‑economy Kalecki–Young model.
Step 4 – Open‑economy extension: adding the tradables channel (KYCD‑T)
Step 5 – Sectoral decomposition: KYSID
This is the Kalecki–Young Sectoral Inflation Decomposition (KYSID): an inflation framework grounded in Kalecki’s pricing and distribution, enriched by Young’s balance‑sheet concept of claim dilution and extended to an open economy.
Stock–flow perspective on ΔDebt, ΔPE and NX
Stylised stock–flow matrix (changes over period t)
Why δ is “excess claim creation”
...."is the net increase in nominal claims on future domestic income not matched by new productive backing."
is the net increase in nominal claims on future domestic income not matched by new productive backing.
Where NX fits
@threadreaderapp
unroll
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Kalecki = Godley: The Unified Income–Financing Identity
A central result of this paper is that Kalecki’s profit identity and Godley’s sectoral balances identity are not separate theoretical constructions but two expressions of the same underlying mechanism, viewed from different sides of the national accounts.
Kalecki presents the income side; Godley presents the financing side.
Once placed within a stock–flow consistent (SFC) framework, the equivalence becomes exact.
The Constant-Rate Interest Burden as the Hidden Driver of Capital Share: Evidence from Balance-Sheet Saturation
This balance-sheet mechanism explains the secular rise in the capital share and the decline in labor share observed since the 1980s without appealing to exogenous technology shocks.
Conceptually, it represents the interest-service load that would prevail if monetary policy had not reduced nominal rates in response to debt expansion. While the actual burden rtL/Y fluctuates with policy cycles, the constant-rate version isolates the structural leverage component, reflecting the underlying stock of liabilities relative to income.
Ergodicity vs expected-utility assumes the return distribution is exogenous.
But in a credit economy, returns are endogenously driven by balance-sheet expansion (A≈L).
Investors maximize share of system claims subject to leverage guardrails — not abstract utility or stationary distributions.
Kelly works within a balance-sheet regime, not instead of one.