Few economists would use that line, although they might believe it. They would say that they have a better work ethic. They would also allow luck to play a role.
On Sat, Jul 29, 2006 at 10:10:28AM -0400, Charles Brown wrote: > What about the notion that competition will produce the best, individual > rational man maximizing his self-interest and profit, may the best man win, > the fittest man, roughly speaking ? > > Aren't the rich rich because they are the fittest economic competitors, > naturally constituting themselves as economic overseers ? > > How is it that NC explains that some people become richer than others ? > > > Charles > > * From: Michael > > I don't think that most economists would admit to believing in a hereditary > component to the class system. Individual initiative can lift anyone out of > poverty and into prosperity, according to this theory. > > On Fri, Jul 28, 2006 at 08:07:11AM -0700, Jim Devine wrote: > > no. The Chicago school (Milton Friedman _et al_) and neo-liberalism > > are effectively versions of social darwinism, but most of the rest of > > NC economics isn't. > > > > On 7/28/06, Charles Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Is neo-classical economic theory a version of social darwinism ? > > > > > > Charles > > > > > > -- > > Jim Devine / "An economist is a surgeon with an excellent scalpel and > > a rough-edged lancet, who operates beautifully on the dead and -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu
