From: Riccardo Bellofiore (riccardo.bellofiore@UNIBG.IT)
Date: Wed Nov 24 2004 - 12:23:33 EST
In fact, I agree with very much of what is written here - except for some adjective whichj add nothing to content: insidious, for example. But the substance is right. What just must be added is that the development of GET has amounted to a more radical destruction of marginalism than the one by Sraffians. riccardo At 9:05 -0800 24-11-2004, Rakesh Bhandari wrote: >At 7:51 PM +0100 11/23/04, Anders Ekeland wrote: >> >>Notions crying of for some harsh deconstruction. Joan Robinson made a major >>contribution to that - especially on "capital". > >I don't know if pointing to circular reasoning in parables compares >to Derrida's deconstruction of the great philosophical texts. At any >rate, general equilibrium theory simply did away with the idea of a >single price of capital, and scoffed at reswitching as of no >empirical concern. So this famous deconstruction doesn't seem to >amount to much, and certaintly does not compensate for her insidious >attempt to vanquish the spectre of Marx by making him appear as a >proto Keynesian. Didn't Schumpeter complain that this is what Sweezy >was trying to do as well? > >rb -- Riccardo Bellofiore Dipartimento di Scienze Economiche "Hyman P. Minsky" Università di Bergamo Via dei Caniana 2 I-24127 Bergamo, Italy e-mail: riccardo.bellofiore@unibg.it direct +39-035-2052545 secretary +39-035 2052501 fax: +39 035 2052549 homepage: http://wwwesterni.unibg.it/dse/homepage/bellofiore.htm
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Nov 25 2004 - 00:00:01 EST