SHOE Archives

Societies for the History of Economics

SHOE@YORKU.CA

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All 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] (Roy Davidson)
Date:
Fri Mar 31 17:18:18 2006
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (26 lines)
================= HES POSTING ===================== 
 
The term "Political Economy" was intended to differentiate it from 
household economy as applying to the larger unit such as community or 
nation-state. The transition to "Economics" would seem to embody a change 
in the scope and definition of the discipline. Turgot, in his REFLECTIONS 
ON THE FORMATION AND DISTRIBUTION OF WEALTH, and Adam Smith, an admirer of 
the French Phyiocrats, in his classic AN INQUIRY INTO THE NATURE  AND 
CAUSES OF THE WEALTH OF NATIONS, were investigating the natural laws of 
the Production and Distribution of wealth. Henry George carried on this 
Classical tradition utilizing Ricardo's doctrine of Rent to arrive at more 
radical conclusions. 
 
Francis A Walker, a contemporary of George, was opposed to George's remedy 
although accepting Ricardo on Rent and faulting Bastiat and Henry Carey  
for their misapprehension of the doctrine. Walker, although writing a 
"Political Economy" text would seem to be part of the transition to 
"Economics" being sympathetic to Jevons and the Marginalist School. J.B. 
Clark, in attempting to equate Land with Capital, was more definitely a 
catalyst in the transition. Ultimately, "Economics" became more a study of 
the optimum use of scarce resources, a theory of exchanges,etc.    
 
============ FOOTER TO HES POSTING ============ 
For information, send the message "info HES" to [log in to unmask] 
 

ATOM RSS1 RSS2