From The Pomp of Power, 1922

. . . France is the one country in Europe which need have little fear of the inroads of Bolshevism. The primary effect of that political theory seems to have been the division of land amongst the peasants (it is said that more than 99 per cent. of it is now so held) while coupling with that division the theory of communism which deprives the holder of any personal property in the products. But in a country where nearly everyone is a proprietor there is little chance of success for a political doctrine which wishes to limit that already acquired ownership by the addition of communistic principles, which proprietors would regard only as a handicap.

( page 211 )

New York : George H. Doran, 1922.

From The Keynesian Revolution, Lawrence R. Klein, 1947

It should be recalled that the classical economists assumed away the problem of unemployment in their theoretical system, yet they kept occupied with economic research. How then did they spend their time? They made contributions toward the solution of the problem of allocating resources in a full-employment economy.

We too must study this problem, once we have put all our men and machines to some useful effort. The productive factors must be distributed among industries and occupations in such a way that we get as high a value of full-employment output as is physically possible within our accepted pattern of work and leisure.

The problem of resource allocation was not treated by Keynes, because there were more urgent matters at hand. But resource allocation will again become urgent when the problems that have bothered Keynes are solved.

New York : Macmillan, 2nd ed 1966, page 187.

Comment :   The classical economists �assumed away� the problem of unemployment.

Apparently, the �classical economists� did not consider the problem of �unemployment�. They could not have 'assumed away' a something that had not been previously considered.

The statement had led me (for one) to question, is such an assumption as the �problem of unemployment� necessary.

�How did they [the classical economists] spend their time? They made contributions toward the solution of the problem of allocating resources in a full-employment economy�.

That implies, or, almost says, that they (the classical economists) were assuming �full-employment economy� — where they, apparently, were not in fact assuming anything on such a subject.

The above implies such a question : was it natural (right, productive) for the classical economists to spend their time on anything other than �full employment economy�?

Howbeit —: they spent their time on �the solution of the problem of allocating resources� — I am told. (I assume that they did not assume, or, suppose, a �full employment�, contrary to what is plainly implied by Mr. Klein — but simply did not consider such a matter).

�The problem of resource allocation was not treated by Keynes�, I am told. Was it the problem treated by the classical economists ? So far as I have seen, �resource allocation� is only a part of any economic cycle by any entity, large or small.

Who exactly were the 'classical economists' I am not told. However, I am told of "their system" (singular). What exactly was "their system" ?

So far as I know there have been a number of authors who could with some justice be called 'classical economists' — but I do not know of "their system" (singular). Was there ever such an animal in existence ?

WPT

http://larvatusprodeo.net/2006/02/09/keynes-as-a-general-theory/

Browder, Earl, 1891-1973. Title(s) Keynes, Foster and Marx. Publisher Yonkers, N. Y., 1950- Paging v. port. 18 cm.