>Which raises the question. What do the contributors to this thread have in   
>mind when they write of studying the history of error?  
  
What I had in mind was what I hear here, not angels on the pinhead, more   
about whatever (they think) is wrong with Marx, or Marshall, or Pareto, or   
Keynes, or Hayek, or or Kuznets, or Modigliani, or Solow, whatever some   
theorist in the past did not see correctly as best susceptible to the   
particular reduction to formula they themselves are about to perform, in   
the firm expectation of applause, if not a prize.  
  
John Womack