Subject: | |
From: | |
Date: | Fri Mar 31 17:18:51 2006 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
"PRODUCTION"??? Did you say "production"? It=B4s in its hidden abode, I
presume. We are economists, Sir!. "Nous n'avons pas besoin de cette
hypothese". Of course, textbooks go on about Vinerian curves and
Marshallian empty boxes, sometimes providing estimates of minimum efficient
scales as percentage of the industry, etc.. But production is not
subjectivist enough. Moreover, in the model just assume a convex set.
[Non-convexity was introduced by Arrow & Hahn in their 1971 text with the
Miltonian quote "A gulf profound as that Serbonian bog, Betwixt Damiata and
Mount Cassius old, Where armies whole have sunk"]. In the unwieldy tome
"Microeconomic theory" by MSG - the standard and technically superlative
postgraduate textbook - the word "labor" does not appear in the index. [It
should have appeared between "Kuhn-Tucker conditions" and "Lagrange
multipliers"]. My favourite though, is J Trout Rader's article in the New
Palgrave: "Production as Indirect Exchange".
As for Georgescu-Roegen, I think that the majority of postgrads think that
he is the guy who invented X-rays.
Nicholas J. Theocarakis
|
|
|