Evan Jones writes: > ... The character, fate of GM, IBM > or any other real-life business entity, big or small, is of > absolutely no consequence to neoclassical economics. This herculean > detachment is what gives NC economics its elegance and its longevity. It strikes me that one could say the same thing about Marxian economics. Its criticism of capitalism stands independently of the rise or fall of any particular "real-life entity". On this score recall Marx's comment in his preface to the first German edition of _Capital_: "...here individuals are dealt with only in so far as they are the personifications of economic categories, embodiments of particular class-relations and class interests." Thus it's hard for me to see how Evan's comments stand as a criticism of neoclassical economics in particular. Gil Skillman
