The transformation problem has provoked controversy within Marxism and derision from without for more than a century. Bourgeois economists in particular (beginning with Ladislaus Bortkiewicz, and continuing, most notoriously, with Paul Samuelson) have seized on it to argue for…
This seems like a good read. Bookmarked after a skim.
I’m currently reading “How Labor Powers the Global Economy,” and after skimming the OP, this seems like exactly what HLPtGE set out to address. It’s a very, very compelling reformulation of capitalist economics and the LTV that embraces the inherent chaos of prices without hand-waving them away, like most economists of all persuasions, including Marxists, do today. Its a model that borrows a lot of techniques from statistical mechanics and other physical sciences, so much so that people have started calling the approach “econophysics.”
This seems like a good read. Bookmarked after a skim.
I’m currently reading “How Labor Powers the Global Economy,” and after skimming the OP, this seems like exactly what HLPtGE set out to address. It’s a very, very compelling reformulation of capitalist economics and the LTV that embraces the inherent chaos of prices without hand-waving them away, like most economists of all persuasions, including Marxists, do today. Its a model that borrows a lot of techniques from statistical mechanics and other physical sciences, so much so that people have started calling the approach “econophysics.”
Oh interesting, haven’t run across HLPtGE. Sounds like a good complementary read.