Date: Sun, 14 May 1995 16:44:26 -0400 (EDT)
From: glevy-AT-acnet.pratt.edu
Subject: Re: Value - Steve's paper: Part 3


I assume that John is asking a rhetorical question.

Expressing the issue somewhat differently, Sraffa and the Neo-Ricardians 
assume that all constant capital is constant circulating capital.  Since 
they don't analyze constant fixed capital, they have no theory of 
depreciation -- moral or otherwise -- and, therefore, have no theory of 
technological change.  If this is a misrepresentation of the 
Neo-Ricardian position, someone PLEASE correct me.

I've been looking through my reference works on Marx for sections on 
"moral depreciation."  It seems that most Marxist economists have 
precious little to say on this important topic.  Does anybody out there 
have any useful references?

On Sun, 14 May 1995, John R. Ernst wrote:

>  
> Jerry, 
>  
> I don't get it.  If, as you say, the neo-ricardians do not have technical
> change in their models, how does their refutation of 
> Marx's falling rate of profit work as the fall is part of his idea of 
> technical change? 
>  
>  
>                                                       John 
>  
>  
> 


     --- from list marxism-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---

     ------------------