Начала политической экономии и податного обложения = The principles of political economy and taxation

The philosophy of hegel

Between tradition and revolution: The hegelian transformation of political philosophy

Routledge are extending the chronological coverage of the critical assessments of David Ricardo. The original 4 volume set was first published in 1985. Since that time, new articles have come to light, and are now published in these four additional volumes.

David Ricardo : critical assessments - second series

This paper was presented at the 2011 Annual Conference of the European Society for the
History of Economic Thought, held at Bogacizi University, Istanbul, from 19 to 21 May 2011.

A new look at Marx's refutation of Ricardo's refutation of the labor theory of value

I also gratefully acknowledge the financial aid of Partehartuz Research Project, IT 300-10, Department of Political Science, University of the Basque Country.

Are Labor and Freedom Compatible? Political Economy, Hegel’s Practical Philosophy and the Young Marx

This paper has two parts. In the first I critically analyze Smith’s refutation of the labor theory of value in book I, chapter 6 of his “Wealth of Nations”. My thesis is that Smith’s refutation is unsound and that Ricardo and Marx rightly saw why. In the second part I discuss Blaug’s critique of the Ricardo-Marx refutation of Smith. According to Blaug, Ricardo and Marx fail to understand Smith. I disagree with Blaug and hold, first, that he has not rightly understood the Ricardo-Marx refutation of Smith and, secondly, that this refutation is conclusive. Interestingly, the view that Smith’s refutation of the labor theory of value is sound dominates current History of Economics which, surprisingly, does not pay much attention to the Ricardo-Marx refutation. Blaug’s textbook is an exception and defends Smith from the Ricardo-Marx attack. In this paper, I want to rescue the Ricardo-Marx refutation of Smith from oblivion and explain why it is correct.

Adam Smith on labour and value: challenging the standard interpretation

In this paper, I examine the treatment of competitive profit of professor Varian in his textbook on Microeconomics, as a representative of the “modern” post-Marxian view on competitive profit. I show how, on the one hand, Varian defines profit as the surplus of revenues over cost and, thus, as a part of the value of commodities that is not any cost. On the other hand, however, Varian defines profit as a cost, namely, as the opportunity cost of capital, so that, in competitive conditions, the profit or income of capital is determined by the opportunity cost of capital. I argue that this second definition contradicts the first and that it is based on an incoherent conception of opportunity cost.

Profit and Cost in "Modern" Post-Marxian Profit Theory: A Case Study from Varian's "Intermediate Microeconomics"

This paper was presented at the VI STOREP Conference, held at the University of Florence, Italy, 3rd and 4th June 2009.

Kepa Mirena

Papers

A new look at Marx's refutation of Ricardo's refutation of the labor theory of value

Are Labor and Freedom Compatible? Political Economy, Hegel’s Practical Philosophy and the Young Marx

Adam Smith on labour and value: challenging the standard interpretation

Profit and Cost in "Modern" Post-Marxian Profit Theory: A Case Study from Varian's "Intermediate Microeconomics"

Marx´ Critique of the Currency Principle