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] (Mason Gaffney)
Date:
Sun Nov 26 21:28:47 2006
In-Reply-To:
Message-ID:
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (19 lines)
Maybe Walras was schizophrenic, but maybe, and more likely, he meant that  
his model of commodity markets presupposed that, and would work well only  
if, the land market was lubricated by a substantial annual tax based on  
value, as he urged so vigorously and eloquently in his Theorie d'Economie  
Sociale. That was certainly the overtly stated view of Henry George, arrived  
at independently.   
  
Jaffe contributed, intentionally or not, to the hijacking of Walras by  
translating the pure-market-techie stuff long before the land tax work. We  
should not be blaming Walras entirely for techies who cherry-picked his  
oeuvres for what they required, and ignored the rest. Likewise we should not  
blame Henry George for Arthur Laffer, Jr.'s, cherrypicking from his ideas to  
promote his notoriously overstated Curve. Laffer ignored George's favorable  
view of taxing land values. Laffer even supported Howard Jarvis's  
Proposition 13 in California. "Evvaboddy talkin bout Hebbin ain't gwine  
dere".  
  
Mason Gaffney  

ATOM RSS1 RSS2