Re: Article in the Chronicle of Higher Education

["Erdogan Bakir" <erdogan.bakir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Yes, really WOW. Could you please point me to the references
frow which you draw your conlusion about marxian economics so
that I can figure out how I could not pick up this point of yours
among thousands of pages written by Marx, not to mention second
hand sources.
Is this the same logic as the one you used before in your
"international money and real world" when you announced the
failure of radical school in explaining the economic reality, which
was brought about by the demise of the soviet system, or
something to that effect.
I also would like to ask how accurate it is to reduce the differences
between mainstream and non-mainstream economics to the
number of axioms they employ in their models. Some mainstream
economists such as Turnovsky, Bernanke, Coleman, to name but
few, relaxed some of those restrictive assumptions in their recent
papers, so does this mean that differences will disappear in the
near future?
erdogan

From:           	Michael Perelman <michael@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Wow. You learn something new each day.  I must have been reading a
different edition.

On Mon, Jan 27, 2003 at 03:38:47PM -0500, pdavidso wrote:
>
> Thus, for example, Marxian economics becomes a special case of the special
> case classical theory---where axioms about power (instead of competition) are
> added to the classical ergodic assumption and the long-run neutrality of money
> axiom.
>