SHOE Archives

Societies for the History of Economics

SHOE@YORKU.CA

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
[log in to unmask] (Alain Alcouffe)
Date:
Fri Jan 12 13:10:04 2007
In-Reply-To:
<45A7B9F0.25415.1200323@localhost>
Message-ID:
References:
<45A7B9F0.25415.1200323@localhost>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (22 lines)
Well, I checked the web as John as I prepared the same commentar as Regina.
I did not find in any language a translation and/or a translation of Bohm 
Bawerk by Joaquin Reig (or his brother Luis). The refutation of Marx by 
Bohm Bawerk appears several  times in the Spanish translations of Mises 
by Joaquin Reig but at any place, did I found an alllusion 
(introduction, footnotes, whatever) to Marx reading of Bohm Bawerk (not 
to say Jevons).

In a forthcoming paper (coauthored with F. & G. Quaas), we present the 
"prehistory" of the transformation problem (Capital Vol 1 to  Capital 
Vol  III). Indeed the transformation was a problem long before Bohm 
Bawerk or Bortkiewiz dealt with it. F. & G. Quaas quotes a letter  to  
Ferdinand D. Nieuwenhuis June 27, 1880 which proves that Marx followed 
this discussion involving several European economists and was 
unrepentant about his theory of value at this time.  (Unfortunately I 
did not find an English translation of this letter, but it probably exists)
Anyway, I would also be interested to know more about this introduction 
by Joaquin Reig.

Alain Alcouffe 


ATOM RSS1 RSS2