RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: workers' saving & Marxian political economy

["Forstater, Mathew" <ForstaterM@xxxxxxxx>]

By the way, I had the chance to meet Duesenberry a couple years ago at
the New School and I introduced him to some people and mentioned that he
was the innovator of the relative income hypothesis.  He said that
Edward Chamberlain wrote on monopolistic competition and never did
anything else after that and he did not want to be thought of in that
way at all--he had no interest in discussing the relative income
hypothesis.

By the by the way, has anyone else heard that Ken Prewitt has resigned
as Dean of the NS's Graduate Faculty--supposedly in disgust with the
central administration's refusal to do anything to preserve the
traditions of the GF?  Prewitt's hire was a coup for the GF--after a
couple very weak Deans, this former head of the U.S. census had raised
hopes...

-----Original Message-----
From: Forstater, Mathew
Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2002 10:16 AM
To: pen-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: [PEN-L:23636] RE: RE: RE: Re: workers' saving & Marxian
political economy

I like the classical/Marxian class-based approach supplemented with the
Veblen-Duesenberry relative income hypothesis far more than the life
cycle/permament income approach.