[OPE-L:5255] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: one commodity models and illustrations

From: Rakesh Narpat Bhandari (rakeshb@Stanford.EDU)
Date: Sat Mar 24 2001 - 12:42:41 EST

I rather liked Meghnad Desai's analysis of simple reproduction in the 
first part of his Marxian Economics Book (as I now remember it). I 
read his interpretation as follows: even assuming away the 
disturbances from the continuous revolution in values in terms of its 
effect on stocks of fixed capital, there are so still so many points 
of possible disturbance on the both the value and the technical side 
in simple and expanded reproduction that it is inconceivable that 
capitalist development could ever take the form of equilibrium growth.

This of course is also the thrust of Grossman's interpretation of the 
schema in his dynamics book.  There was some debate between Andrew K 
and Paul Z about whether the schema were meant to prove the 
possibility of expanded reproduction without a permanent consumption 
deficit. It seems to me that Marx himself was trying to demonstrate 
in his schema is that capitalist development at any point cannot 
reasonably be expected to take place in equilibrium.

Yours, Rakesh

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon Apr 02 2001 - 09:57:30 EDT