[ show plain text ]
I would like a copy too
Paul Cockshott
Paul@cockshott.com
----- Original Message -----
From: Ajit Sinha <ajitsinha@lbsnaa.ernet.in>
To: <ope-l@galaxy.csuchico.edu>
Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2000 7:27 AM
Subject: [OPE-L:3849] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Rational expectations Marxism
>
>
> Steve Keen wrote:
>
> > Here's one where I *disagree* with Ajit!
> >
> > For a formal statement as to why, you might check my critique of
Steedman's
> > "Questions for Kaleckians" in ROPE: Answers (and Questions) for
Sraffians
> > (and Kaleckians)", Review of Political Economy, Vol. 10, No. 1, 73-87.
>
> ____________________
>
> Steve, I would love to read your piece. Could you send me a copy either
through
> e-mail or snail mail? My library has just started to get ROPE, so we have
only the
> last two issues or so. My sense is that your paper came out little
earlier.
> _____________________
>
> > For a brief f'ristance of the argument there, one mainstay of static
price
> > theory is that the sum of any column of the input-output matrix must sum
to
> > less than one (colloquially; technically, the dominant eigenvalue of the
IO
> > matrix must be less than one). Steedman uses this to critique Kaleckian
> > markup pricing, and it can also be used to rule out any IO matrix which
> > breaches that rule since the equilibrium price vector it will generate
will
> > have negative prices.
> >
> > However, in a dynamic context, such a matrix is feasible, since it can
> > result in rising prices which will always move away from the negative
> > equilibrium vector. Thus what is not feasible in an equilibrium setting
is,
> > in this instance, quite feasible in a dynamic setting.
>
> ______________________
>
> My question would be what are you measuring your prices in, and how that
measure
> remains invariant in the dynamic context. Otherwise you are measuring
changes with
> a yard stick that itself is changing. Cheers, ajit sinha
>
> >
> >
> > However, this does not constitute any support from me for the TSS
approach,
> > I might add. I would want to separate out various stages of the dynamic
> > process--for instance by distinguishing technical change from the
> > underlying IO dynamics initially, and then introducing technical change
in
> > a logically coherent and, if possible, separate representation.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Steve
> > At 06:04 PM 9/18/00 +0530, you wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >clyder wrote:
> > >
> > >> > Rakesh is right on target here. The Babbage problem is central to
the
> > >> problem
> > >> > associated with Rational Expectations Marxism. In an economy with
rapid
> > >> tech.
> > >> > change, no one can predict what an appropriate value-depreciation
should
> > >> be.
> > >>
> > >> Does this not vitiate the whole premise of the formation of a uniform
rate
> > >> of profit?
> > >>
> > >> Is the idea of a transformation from values to prices of production
still
> > >> tenable
> > >> if the valuation of fixed capital is indeterminate?
> > >
> > >____________________
> > >
> > >I think a theory of prices is essentially a static problem. There
cannot be a
> > >dynamic theory of prices, particularly when technological change is
taken
> > into
> > >consideration. You simply cannot have any means of consistent
measurement.
> > >Ricardo did want to have a theory of prices in a dynamic context of
technical
> > >change. But all the works have shown that this was "will o' the wisp".
> > Cheers,
> > >ajit sinha
> > >
> > >
> > Dr. Steve Keen
> > Senior Lecturer
> > Economics & Finance
> > University of Western Sydney Macarthur
> > Building 11 Room 30,
> > Goldsmith Avenue, Campbelltown
> > PO Box 555 Campbelltown NSW 2560
> > Australia
> > s.keen@uws.edu.au 61 2 4620-3016 Fax 61 2 4626-6683
> > Home 02 9558-8018 Mobile 0409 716 088
> > Home Page: http://bus.macarthur.uws.edu.au/steve-keen/
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Sep 30 2000 - 00:00:05 EDT