all.
>Not only have I read the book, I own a copy sitting in
>my office, :-).
>Barkley Rosser
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>(for anti-elitists on the list)
>http://cob.jmu.edu/rosserjb
>
>-Original Message-
>From: Jim Devine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: [E
te: Thursday, February 08, 2001 3:08 PM
Subject: [PEN-L:7930] Re: Re: Socialist calculation debate
>I've been thinking a bit since my last writing on this topic (back in
>1993). The creation of new enterprises plays a crucial role, I think,
>in creating and assembling new informat
-
From: Jim Devine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thursday, February 08, 2001 2:56 PM
Subject: [PEN-L:7928] Re: Re: Socialist calculation debate
>At 01:17 PM 2/8/01 -0500, you wrote:
>> Most of the heavy hitters in that debate have
>
From: Jim Devine [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>actually, A & H _do_ emphasize neoclassical efficiency. In many ways, they
are very neoclassical. Read their book.
I agree. I was a discussant on an urpe panel on environmental issues with Hahnel
and the foundation of his paper was a supply and deman
very well, or as well
> as prices in impersonal markets.
> Barkley Rosser
> -Original Message-
> From: Peter Dorman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 6:45 PM
> Subject: [PEN-L:7884] Socialist calculatio
At 01:17 PM 2/8/01 -0500, you wrote:
> Most of the heavy hitters in that debate have
>ignored Albert and Hahnel. But, I think that they
>view their approach as one way around the
>issues raised by the Austrians, even if they do
>not emphasize traditional neoclassical efficiency
>outcomes.
actua
gt;
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 6:45 PM
Subject: [PEN-L:7884] Socialist calculation debate
>Does it have any relevance to the participatory economics model
>promulgated by Albert and Hahnel?
>
>Peter
>
>
>
>Does it have any relevance to the participatory economics model
>promulgated by Albert and Hahnel?
>
>
Sure. As I have explained at some length in various contexts, A&H have never
explained adequately how their model answers the questions pushed by the
Austrians about how a nonmarket system
Does it have any relevance to the participatory economics model
promulgated by Albert and Hahnel?
Peter
