From: mongiovg (mongiovg@STJOHNS.EDU)
Date: Tue Dec 02 2003 - 14:50:37 EST
Well, you can't go wrong with "linear production theory." "Surplus approach" works if you're talking about Sraffa, Pasinetti and Steedman, but doesn't really fit for Leontief and I think there is some ambiguity as regards von Neumann (though Kurz & Salvadori put vN squarely in the Sraffian tradition). No one to whom the label "neo-Ricardian" is applied likes it, so I'd avoid it simply on the grounds of good manners. I suspect that it is often used by some Marxists or critical realists to suggest a certain bourgeoise backwardness. Regards, Gary >===== Original Message From Ian Wright <ian_paul_wright@HOTMAIL.COM> ===== >I would like to use the correct or accepted label for the class of economic >models associated with Von Neumann, Sraffa, Pasinetti, Steedman and >others. The common elements I want to characterise are: (i) simultaneous >solution to a set of technical-production constraints, (ii) distribution of >a physical, surplus product, (iii) production of commodities by means of >commodities. >Can anyone tell me what is the accepted label for this class of models? >I've come across labels such as "neo-Ricardian", "surplus approach", >"linear production theory" and "physical quantities approach". Is there a >commonly accepted label that the practitioners accept? > >Thanks for any help in advance. > >-Ian. > >_________________________________________________________________ >The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE* >http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Dec 04 2003 - 00:00:00 EST