<< (1) Introduction: A general distinction between scarcity approach paradigm
and surplus approach paradigm. >>
Instead of the above, a "general distinction" the TSS would make is
between use-value and labor value paradigms. We also distiguish between
equilibrium and non-equilibrium approaches. TSSers presented some of their
recent thinking on this in papers at the last EEA. Non-TSSers, Roy Rotheim,
J. Barkely Rosser, and Gary Mongovi, and others also discussed/debated some of
these distinctions.
Ajit next listed: "2) A Critique of partial equilibrium approach,
particularly the circularlogic of determination of prices and income. Thus, a
need for general
equilibrium"
Instead of the above, in TSS, the circular logic is broken without
General Equilibrium because things take place in clear, temporal succession.
On Ajit's number 7 & 8: "(7) Marx's theory of historical materialism and his
theory of exploitation. (8) Need for a theory of price in Marx. A critique of
Marx's theory of
price--the transformation problem."
TSS discusses Marx's theory of exploitation, his theory of price, and
certainly the transformation problem. There are essays relevant to this as
well as general equilibrium in the collection__Marx and Non-Equililbrium
Economics__ by A. Freeman and G. Carchedi, published by Edward Elgar in 1996.
This text would make a good reference to give students some idea of the
existence of an alternative TSS paradigm. Perhaps when I get more time I'll
list more individual references.
Ted