James C.W. Ahiakpor wrote:
>
> But I think we can recognize the role of anticipations in David Ricardo's discussion of Say's law in chapter 21, pages 290-92, of his /Principles/, including:
>
> "M. Say has ... most satisfactorily shewn that there is no amount of capital [funds or savings] which may not be employed in a country, because demand is only limited by production. No man produces, but with a view [anticipation?] to consume or sell, and he never sells, but with an intention [anticipation?] to purchase some other commodity, which may be immediately useful to him, or which may contribute to future production. By producing, then, he necessarily becomes either the consumer of his own goods, or the purchaser and consumer of the goods of some other person. It is not to be supposed that he should, for any length of time, be ill-informed of the commodities which he can most advantageously produce, to attain the object which he has in view [anticipation?], namely, the possession of other goods; and therefore, it is not probable that he will continually produce a commodity for which there is no demand.... Too much of a particular commodity may be produced, of which there may be such a glut in the market, as not to repay the capital [funds] expended on it; but this cannot be the case with respect of all commodities."
This seems to me to be too clever by half. If all the things marked as 'anticipations' in this passage were true anticipations, that is, predictions or expectations not realized with certainty, Say's law would NOT hold on EVERY occasion in which things do not turn out as anticipated.
Daniele Besomi
|