=================== HES POSTING ===================== I would like to second Brewer's remarks, to some extent. Neoclassical Economics has its limits. As an explanation of the evolution of economies it fails badly. Still, when it comes to designing policies to meet specifit problems, some strategic suspension of disbelief is in order. If we admit to the existence of a Heraclitean flux, we are doomed to paralysis. To take rational action at some point we have to make a proposal "as if" certain ceteris paribus condition held, "as if" there were certain known principles governing human motivation. For this reason there are economists who bemoan the inablity of Neoclassical Economics to represent reality, while, at the same time, they proceed with the use of that theory to make policy proposals. Brewer has a point. One has to look at the nature of the criticism, not just the fact that there is criticism, before listing the critic among those who disparage Neoclassical theory. Robin Neill ============ FOOTER TO HES POSTING ============ For information, send the message "info HES" to [log in to unmask]