Re: [OPE-L] gen equ and sraffa

From: Anders Ekeland (anders.ekeland@ONLINE.NO)
Date: Thu Oct 25 2007 - 07:55:36 EDT

At 10:42 25.10.2007, Paul Cockshott wrote:
>Remember what Sraffa calls his book.
>It is an imanent critique of political economy in its GE form. He is
>showing that
>Even if we accept their assumptions about equal profit rates , the
>Of neo-classical capital theory do not follow.
>Some of his followers, Steedman for example, then do assume that equal
>rates of profit actually occur, but this need be no more than a
>provisional critical assumption in the context of Sraffa's purpose.

I am quite aware of the "prelude" character of PoCbmoC, the limited
aims of this book, that it is an immanent critique - and that
fragmentary biographical evidence points makes is plausible to argue
that Sraffa basically was for a more dynamic view of Marx - so the
target of my remarks was not Sraffa, but the linear algebraic
school-. the "Sraffa inspired" models. How enthusiastic Sraffa would
have been for Steedman et al. - nobody knows.

Not that there is anything wrong per se about linear algebra, but the
results from such models have to be proven robust with more general,
dynamic models. That is, they must be true simplifications. The
situation today is that they are - like GE - unable to model the
dynamic formation of equilibrium prices, stability of equilibrium etc. etc.

I personally find PoCbmoC very autistic, not that impressing. How is
it possible to write such a book - and not relate more explicitly to
the history of economic ideas, where this book places itself in the
theoretical landscape etc. etc. But I cannot go into a discussion of
PoCbmoC and Sraffa now.


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Oct 31 2007 - 00:00:20 EDT