Jerry's suggestion is a good one, but I'm afraid I've "jumped the gun"
on it to some extent, since I've constructed a Kaleckian version of
this:
Gerald Levy wrote:
> For those who are interested in (2), here's my tentative suggestion: To
> *begin* with, let's not develop equations. Let's begin by establishing the
> assumptions, parameters, and sectors required to initially conceptualize
> the subject at hand in (2) -- the accumulation of capital. Here's my
> tentative list:
>
> o commodity production;
> o money;
> o c, v, ad s are all variables;
> o different branches of production and competition (with different
> compositions of capital and rates of profit).
>
> I think the above would require multi-sectors.
And I've done the equations, which, putting it mildly, are a horror.
The one conclusion that I can draw from it at present which might be of
interest here is that the money supply turned out to be endogenous. I
introduced moneylenders (strictly, a single moneylender), and all
transactions between sectors, workers & capitalists (buying/selling both
labor-power and subssitence commodities), and capitalists and
moneylenders, were carried out via the bank balances of capitalists as
maintained by the moneylenders.
It turned out that bankers' "hoards", which were necessary to have them
undertake the role of bankers, were augmented/decremented by the
capitalist process, but did not directly determine anything in the
system.
Cheers,
Steve
> Let's then consider the circulating-capital-only case where there is
> labor-saving technical change and where the size of the working population
> is allowed to vary.
>
> Let's then consider the cases where there are constant fixed capital,
> different forms of technical change, moral and straight depreciation, and
> different turnover times for constant fixed capital.
>
> Let's then consider financial markets and demand.
>
> Let's then consider the case where there are different market structures
> in branches of production, e.g. where there is oligopolistic rivalry and
> price determination by some firms.
>
> Let's then consider other variables not explicitly dealt with above.
>
> This sounds like a rather large plate, but I think that ultimately it
> would be a useful -- if prolonged -- discussion.
>
> What do others think about the above?
>
> In Solidarity,
>
> Jerry