Reese, David, ed. Legacy of Keynes, Harper and Row, San Francisco, 1987. Rymes, Thomas. Keynes' Lectures, 1932-35: Notes of a Representative Student (Ann Arbour: The University of Michigan Press, 1989). Shackle, G.L.S. The Years of High Theory (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1967). Tarshis, Lorie. Review of Allan Meltzer's Keynes' Monetary Theory: A Different Interpretation, Journal of Economic The outstanding faults of economic society in which we live are its failure to provide for full employment and its arbitrary and inequitable distribution of wealth and incomes. The bearing of foregoing theory on first of these is obvious (Keynes, 1936, p. 372). Controversy over both meaning and contribution of General Theory has resulted in what David Colander has termed the what did really mean (1990, p. 294). The present contribution to sweepstakes takes opening quotation from Keynes' concluding chapter of General Theory as a basis for outlining an alternative interpretation of evolution of Keynes' contribution to economic theory and policy. In addition, outline presented provides an overarching framework that may be used to explain how conflicting interpretations of work have arisen.(1) As Lorie Tarshis has noted was not one author, he was many (1990, p. 1203). In both breadth of topics covered and methods employed to evaluated economic questions, was both versatile and eclectic. That he has been interpreted as having presented a disequilibrium theory (Leijonhufvud, 1968), a long-run equilibrium theory (Amadeo, 1989; Milgate and Eatwell, 1983) and that he shifted from sequential analysis in Treatise to an equilibrium approach in General Theory (Kohn, 1986) should not be surprising given standard joke circulating in 1931 that where five economists are gathered together there will be six conflicting opinions and two of them will be held by Keynes (qtd. in Clarke, 1988, pp. 231-2). This was not result of confusion, but rather reflective of Keynes' ability to adapt his policy prescriptions to changing economic circumstances.(2) Notwithstanding his apparent tendency to shift policy positions, argument presented below suggests that there was a fundamental consistency underlying research pursued by Keynes. It is argued that perceived a fundamental institutional and motivational difference between theory developed by classical school of economics and actual monetary economy that policy makers sought to influence. This evolution in monetary institutions led to formation of an inherently unstable economy -- points effectively reiterated by Minsky (1975) and Vicarelli (1984). consistently argued for a stable price level in order to ensure that entrepreneurs could reasonably form expectations that would lead to maximal employment and growth. As Meltzer (1988) has recently suggested, long-run nature of Keynes' policy prescriptions was, in part, designed to minimize deviation between long-term rate of interest and socially optimal rate of interest that would bring about full employment. It cannot be over emphasized, however, that it was new set of monetary institutions and potential liquidity fetish that these institutions permitted that constituted a central theme in Keynes' writings. Given central role played by money in our monetary economy, attempted to revise traditional quantity theory of money in terms of entrepreneurs' and consumers' expectations concerning money profits and incomes. The development of his monetary theory of production was an attempt to forge a link between microtheoretic decision process of individual agents and macroeconomic effects that changes in expectations would bring about. Many have argued that broke with Quantity Theory after Treatise (see Kahn, 1984). …