Henry George, self-taught economist to the common man, developed a strong following outside the halls of academic discourse for his ideas about land, rent, and the single tax. Since he drew the ire of important economists such as John Bates Clark and Alfred Marshall, it should come as no surprise that few professional economists were willing to acknowledge his influence on the economics of the day. Yet, a closer look reveals that at least in the case of Thorstein Veblen, a clear connection can be made between these two important American thinkers. The concept of an unearned increment establishes their shared connection by illustrating the tension that exists between individuals and communities when individual property rights are assigned to community assets.

The aggregation of budget constraints of enterprises and households allows us to throw a new light on the controversy between Keynes and Harrod concerning the classical theory of the rate of interest. It appears that the critique of the classical theory that Keynes formulated does not presuppose the liquidity preference theory; it is based on the multiplier theory. We show that this critique is logically founded and that it is based upon the absence of the labor market in the analysis of the interdependence between the markets for financial assets and for goods. Harrod did not comprehend it completely. This explains one lacuna in the model of the General Theory that Harrod proposed in 1937. We show that it lacks an equation and that the equilibrium (hence the rate of interest) is indeterminate, which is not the case in the 1937 article by Hicks. We conclude that if there is relevance in Keynes’s criticism of the classical theory, then a similar criticism can be directed at Keynes’s own theory.