[OPE-L:8102] Re: Steedman on Ricardo indeed including constant capital in national product

From: gerald_a_levy (gerald_a_levy@msn.com)
Date: Tue Dec 03 2002 - 21:16:49 EST

Paul Z wrote in [8092]:

> Steedman wrote a chapter in 1982 on "Marx on Ricardo" in *Classical and
> Marxian Political Economy* in which he claimed that Marx was wrong to
> assert that Ricardo, like Smith, left out constant capital in the value of
> national product.  I have not seen any rejoinder to Steedman (Fred Moseley
> has an article in 1998 on Smith's error but doesn't even cite Steedman).
> Has anyone seen a rejoinder to this point of Steedman's?  Since Marx
> repeatedly says that Smith and Ricardo were wrong, it would seem pretty
> significant if Marx himself were in error.

Keith Gibbard's paper "Marx on Ricardo on Time" deals, in part, with this
issue. See http://www.gre.ac.uk/~fa03/iwgvt/files/01-gibbard.rtf

I believe that an examination of Marx's writings on political economists
from the standpoint of inquiring into whether Marx understood different
authors (including Ricardo) correctly might make an interesting dissertation
topic from a history of thought perspective.   However, even if it was shown
that Marx misunderstood the perspectives of a particular author or even of
several authors, it is unclear to me whether that would be a 'pretty
significant' result or just a footnote in the history of economic thought.

In solidarity, Jerry

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Dec 04 2002 - 00:00:01 EST