On the Endogeneity of the Margin and Related Issues in Ricardian Economics

1991 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 159-174 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samuel Hollander

As Kenneth Arrow has pointed out in a recent paper, “David Ricardo was a peaceful man” (Arrow 1991, p. 70). Indeed he was—during his lifetime. I am not so sure he is resting peacefully given the further assertion that his system was “a bold attempt to determine values independent of demand considerations” (ibid., p. 75). Arrow adds, byway of qualification, that he does “not think, as some neo-Ricardians seem to, that there was in any sense an intended repudiation of the demand schedule”; rather Ricardo did not conceive of such a schedule even though “some of [his] analysis can only be made sensible on the basis of such a concept.”

1993 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 54-71 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. E. Johnson
Keyword(s):  
P 75 ◽  

Professor Kenneth Arrow has now added his views to the current Ricardian controversy in a provocative survey of alternative judgments regarding David Ricardo's contribution (Arrow 1991). Arrow's primary thesis appears to be that “the main thrust of Ricardo's system is a bold attempt to determine values independent of demand considerations” (Arrow 1991, p. 75), a position which has already come under attack (Caravale 1991; Hollander 1991). Our aim, however, is not to examine Ricardo's treatment of demand directly, but to question the fundamental suppositions upon which Arrow's analysis rests and the resulting conclusion that emerges.


2001 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 842 ◽  
Author(s):  
S.-H. Ahn ◽  
A. B. Davey ◽  
W. A. Crossland
Keyword(s):  

1952 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 130 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emile James ◽  
P. Sraffa ◽  
M. H. Dobb ◽  
David Ricardo
Keyword(s):  

Author(s):  
Tomas L. G. Andersson ◽  
Bertil Davidsson ◽  
Brigitte Stehle ◽  
Peter Hoglund
Keyword(s):  

2000 ◽  
Vol 31 (1) ◽  
pp. 838 ◽  
Author(s):  
V. Sergan ◽  
P. J. Bos ◽  
G. D. Sharp
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document