A response to Jerry Levy's reply to my questions/comments about GE models
and technical change:
A 2-good model is often sufficient to illustrate GE effects. I've got
nothing against generalizing the model to n goods, but I'm having enough
trouble with the 2-good case, which is undoubtedly the
I'd like some help with a simple general equilibrium model I'm constructing
to show that technological change can reduce labor demand and employment,
even given all the usual neoclassical assumptions. I've got two goods,
labor and one other input, two output prices, the wage rate and the other
Andrew, here. I've been away from the net for a month + and am now beginning
to wade through things. I wanted to respond to Mike Meeropol's discussion of
the transitivity of value, etc. If A, B, and C are commodities, and IW is
the relation "is worth", as economists use the notion of worth o
Andrew Kliman here, responding to Jim Jaszewski's ad hominem response to my
post re why I left the Marxism list. The one thing I agree with Jim about is
that we should be working to stop the execution of Mumia Abu-Jamal (and
indeed to win his release).
But the rest exhibits a persistent tende
I left the "Marxism" list. I work as an academic, but I'm a Marxist and
an activist. I resent the notion that one is not much of a Marxist or
an ivory-tower type if one leaves the list because of its "grittiness"
and "informality." I do not think that Dana Thorpe and MIM are just
examples o
I was very interested in Terry McDonough's comments about Sam Bowles
being a "one-man crisis of Marxism," and the general drift to the Right
of a lot of left economists. I've found the discussion of the Regulationists
interesting, but Terry has highlighted a broader phenomenon. What
explains
Doug,
thanks for the news. Why do you think the Fed wants to crack down?
And a second question: I read the BLS report of a 15% decline in the
number of workers quitting their jobs last month as a real sign of
slackness in the labor market, if indeed this wasn't a statistical fluke.
How do
What about the new book by Edward Wolff and others? I haven't checked it
out, but it is being touted as definitive.
Andrew Kliman here. Of course, I agree with Carla Orcutt and Jim Devine that
one shouldn't use words like "fascism" and "genocide" lightly. I do not.
That tells you how serious I consider the dangers to be at the present time.
I never called Nixon a fascist, for instance. And I wouldn't eve
Excellent post, Rakesh! Rakesh makes two extremely important points:
Farrakhan is Gingrich in blackface; and the right's policy proposals are
pointing towards genocide from several directions. Let's not forget that
Murray and Herrnstein have floated the idea of turning the ghettos into
rese
I seem to remember an article by Andre Gunder Frank on his experiences at
University of Chicago as a graduate student. It also talked some about
the Chicago Boys and their role as policymakers in Latin America. It
was in, if I remember, the _Review of Radical Political Economics_ sometime
in
A note of clarification:
On 14 May 1995 (Pen-L:5081) 16:58:54.85, Paul Cockshott reported some
statisitcal results and, interpreting them, referred to "the New Soln [New Solution]
of the transformation problem is that advocated by Kliman ..."
I, Kliman, am NOT an advocate of what is *generally*
Can there be anything new to say on this topic? I hope so:
Gil Skillman [PEN-L:4342, 2 Mar 1995, 17.17.09.31] writes that "Andrew [Kliman]
suggests that for Marx the notion that commodity exchange 'expresses something
equal' is a *postulate*." What I wrote [PEN-L:4328, 1 Mar 1995, 11:00.33.69]
Before one says Marx "went wrong" with the "express something equal" argument,
one needs to clarify what the argument was. It seems to me that the discus-
sion thus far hasn't really clarified this. Rather than working through
others' implicit assumptions, I'll state my own view--Marx was at THA
On Thurs, 23 Feb. 1995, 18:30:02, Cathy Mulder asked to whom the Library
of Congess ad was referring, when it asked "Have you heard about the noted economist
who's located the precise point where Karl Marx went wrong ...?"
The answer is (or should be, anyway): Paul Samuelson. He noted that Mar
15 matches
Mail list logo
