>
>I think it's because while Ernst and Bellofiore had emphasized
>dynamic value alone long ago, it was becoming clear that there was a
>sharp divide between temporalists and simultaneists, and many of the
>bombastic dismissals of Marx in regards in particular to the falling
>rate/mass of prof
I left the heading alone only to remind you that such subject headings are
usually a bad sign in themselves. As to the RRPE affair, those that know
cannot tell and those that tell, as far as I can see, don't know. Let's
drop that.
As to the personal questions vis a vis Andrew K., they don't bel
>
>I think it's because while Ernst and Bellofiore had emphasized
>dynamic value alone long ago, it was becoming clear that there was a
>sharp divide between temporalists and simultaneists, and many of the
>bombastic dismissals of Marx in regards in particular to the falling
>rate/mass of prof
>Rakesh,
>
>I would like proof (or at least a better argument) that Kliman was "banned"
>because of his politics. Your argument appears to be: Kliman has a particular
>politics; Kliman was banned; therefore, Kliman was banned because of his
>politics."
>
>I'll say again,
>>Perhaps Rakesh can expla
Eric,
As I said, it looks extremely suspicious that a ban was imposed on
Kliman simply because he may or may not have circulated a mss
elsewhere after (for goodness' stake) RRPE rejected it the first
time. He could have been warned, chastized, the rules could have been
clarified, etc. But a su
Rakesh wrote:
>And I shall say that it seems obvious to me . . that a ban was imposed on
>Kliman not because he was shopping a mss around at more than one
>journal . . .but because he is unlikeable and politically an unabashed
>defender of the economic theory of the proletariat.
Perhaps Rakesh
>In a recent post, Doug Henwood quoted the following:
>
>"the Editorial Board has removed the sanction denying Dr. Kliman
>the right to submit articles to RRPE for publication."
>
>and added sarcastically,
>
>"hey, it's important to get those value theory papers out there if
>we want to overturn b
In a recent post, Doug Henwood quoted the following:
"the Editorial Board has removed the sanction denying Dr. Kliman
the right to submit articles to RRPE for publication."
and added sarcastically,
"hey, it's important to get those value theory papers out there if
we want to overturn bourgeois
I don't believe Doug answered my earlier question about second quarter
earnings reports. I am still wondering what is happening here and I am
starting to see some hints, e.g. from reports on Intel, that some of the
earnings reported may have to do with financial transactions and not
revenues from
