=================== HES POSTING ===================== 
 
I would like to second Brewer's remarks, to some extent. Neoclassical 
Economics has its limits.  As an explanation of the evolution of economies 
it fails badly.  Still, when it comes to designing policies to meet 
specifit problems, some strategic suspension of disbelief is in order.  If 
we admit to the existence of a Heraclitean flux, we are doomed to 
paralysis.  To take rational action at some point we have to make a 
proposal "as if" certain ceteris paribus condition held, "as if" there 
were certain known principles governing human motivation. For this reason 
there are economists who bemoan the inablity of Neoclassical Economics to 
represent reality, while, at the same time, they proceed with the use of 
that theory to make policy proposals.   Brewer has a point.  One has to 
look at the nature of the criticism, not just the fact that there is 
criticism, before listing the critic among those who disparage 
Neoclassical theory. 
 
Robin Neill 
 
============ FOOTER TO HES POSTING ============ 
For information, send the message "info HES" to [log in to unmask]