Date: Thu, 5 Oct 1995 14:50:23 -0400 (EDT)
From: Duncan K Foley <dkf2@columbia.edu>
To: glevy@acnet.pratt.edu
Cc: jlevy@sescva.esc.edu
Subject: Re: Mailing List on Political Economy
Dear Jerry,
I read over the prospectus you sent me, and I think at this point I'd
rather not commit myself to keep up with the discussion. I know several
of the people involved, and respect them and their work, but the
prospectus as drafted seems to me exactly the wrong way to approach the
issues of pushing Marxist insights further. I think we need to identify
areas of dialogue and overlap with mainstream social science, where
Marxian insights and results can help solve outstanding problems. I think
quite a lot has been done in recent years towards developing Marxist
points of view as a living social science, and it would be better to
start with the energy and work we have than returning to Marx's
conception of _Capital_. The idea of surveying all the areas of possible
work seems to me to be grandiose, unnecessary and a distraction from
people following their own instincts on what is important right now.
To put my 2 cents in, I'd like to know from a Marxist/Classical point of
view why the real wage in capitalist economies tends to rise roughly at
the same rate as the productivity of labor, so that the labor share
remains roughly constant. I'd also like to understand the present stage
of world capitalism, and what Marxists could say about its significance
and likely directions of development.
You can put this on the newsgroup if you'd like.
Duncan Foley