DOCSLIB.ORG

1 the Life and Times of David Ricardo 2 Ricardo's Vision 3 Value And

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
1 the Life and Times of David Ricardo 2 Ricardo's Vision 3 Value And Notes 1 The Life and Times of David Ricardo 1. For three appraisals, each roughly half a century apart, see Bagehot (1880), Russell (1934) and Scazzeri (1988). 2. Many books have been devoted to Ricardo, including Blaug (1958); Caravale (1985a), reviewed by Kregel (1987) and Peach (1986b); Caravale and Tosato (1980); Gootzeit (1975), reviewed by Blaug (1976); Henderson (1997), reviewed by Blaug (1999); Hollander 1979; St. Clair (1957, reviewed by Dobb (1957); and Peach (1988, 1993). Reprinted articles on Ricardo can be found in Blaug (1991), Peach (2003a, four volumes) and Wood (1985, four volumes; 1994, three volumes). Essays and encyclopaedia entries include Blaug (1985), De Vivo (1987), Gonner (1913), Kurz (2006, 2008a, 2008c) and Peach (2008). 2 Ricardo’s Vision 1. See also Depoortère (2002, 2008); Gonner (1923); Grampp (1976); Hutchison (1998); Ramana (1957). 2. See also Cremaschi and Dascal (1996, 2002); Depoortère (2002, 2008); Gehrke (2000); Hamouda (1984); Hartwell (1971); Kurz (2008b); Kurz and Gehrke (2006); Ramana (1957). 3. On the Works and Correspondence, see Checkland (1952a, 1952b, 1954, 1956); De Vivo (1996); Gehrke (2005, 2010); Gehrke and Kurz (2002); Hutchison (1953); Marget (1952); Pollitt (1988); Porta (1986a, 1992, 1995, 1996, 2001); Robinson (1951); Rosselli (2001); Sayers (1952); St. Clair (1953); Stigler (1953). 3 Value and Distribution 1. See also Bharadwaj (1983b); Cannan (1893); Caravale (1985b); Costa (1985); Davis (1989); Dobb (1975); Dooley (2005); Gehrke (2003); Gehrke and Kurz (2001); Gordon (1959); J. Hollander (1911c); Hutchison (1994a); Kaldor (1950); Levine (1977); MacDonald (1912); Meek (1974); Moore (1966); Pasinetti (1982); Seligman (1911); Sinha (2010); Young (1978). 2. On Ricardo’s theory of profit, see Buchanan (1929); Davis (1993); Dimand (1990); Eatwell (1975); Edelberg (1933); Gillman (1956); Groenewegen (1972); J. Hollander (1904); S. Hollander (1973, 1975, 1986); Howard (1981); Kaldor (1956); Kregel (1977); Kurz (2011); Nag (1967); Peach (1984, 1986a, 2001); Prendergast (1986a, 1986b); Rakshit (1958); Samuelson (1977); Subramanian (1977); Tucker (1954). 3. On Ricardo’s theory of rent see Anderson (1967); Barkai (1966); Barnes (1984); Bird (1975); Brewer (1988); Buchanan (1929); Camp (1918); Cawley (1983); Davidson (1959); Fine (1983); Johnson (1948); Mishra (1977); Offer (1980); Ohlin (1935); Shammugasundaram (1977); Subbarayadu (1977). 213 214 Notes 4. On the labour theory of value before Ricardo, see Aspromourgos (2006); Burgstaller (1987); Carlson (1994); Cassels (1935); Dobb (1973, 1975); Dooley (2005); Fine (1983); Gehrke and Kurz (2001); D.F. Gordon (1959); Groenewegen (1972); Hamouda (1984); Hollander (1904); Johnson (1984); Kausghil (1971); Konüs 1970; Kurz and Salvadori (1993, 2003); Macdonald (1912); Meek (1956, 1974); Moore (1966); Pasinetti (1981); Rankin (1980); Sinha (2010); Stigler (1958); Wilson and Pate (1968); Wolff, Callari and Roberts (1984). 5. Readers interested in tracing the evolution of Ricardo’s thinking on value in the four years between the publication of the first and third editions should consult the Fragments on Torrens of 1818 (IV, 303– 18), the Notes on Malthus’s Principles of Political Economy of 1820 (II, pp. 1– 451) and the much shorter 1823 manuscript on Malthus that was unaccountably omitted from the Collected Works and published later under the editorship of Pier Luigi Porta (1992). Some of the relevant letters are those to Malthus in June 1818 (VII, pp. 250– 1) and October 1820 (VIII, p. 279); to Trower in September 1818 (VII, p. 297) and July 1821 (IX, pp. 1– 4); to James Mill in December 1818 (VII, p. 377); to McCulloch in December 1819 (VIII, p. 142), May 1820 (VIII, p. 180) and June 1820 (VIII, p. 194); and to Say in January 1820 (VIII, p. 149). 5 Ricardo’s Macroeconomics 1. On the ‘new view’ of Ricardo’s theory of wages, see Casarosa (1974, 1978, 1982, 1985); Hicks (1972); Hicks and Hollander (1977); Hollander (1979, 1983a, 1983b, 1984); Levy (1976); Peach (1986c); Rankin (1984); Rosselli (1985); Stirati (1995). 2. On Ricardo’s views of growth prospects for the English economy, see also Akhtar (1973); Barkai (1959, 1965); Brems (1960, 1970); Burgstaller (1986); Caravale (1985b); Caravale and Tosato (1980); Casarosa (1974, 1978); Corry (1962); Davis (2005); Eltis (1984; 2007); Gehrke, Kurz and Salvadori (2003); Gordon (1983); Green (1992); Hicks (1969, 1979); Hicks and Hollander (1977); Hollander (1980a; 1990a); Kaldor (1956); Kurz (2010b); Laidler (1993); Letiche (1960); Maneschi and Thweatt (1983); Murphy (2009); Peach (1990, 1995); Robbins (1978); Rosselli (2008); Roychowdhury (1975); Sahay (1978); Samuelson (1978); Tucker (1954, 1960). 3. On Say’s Law, see also Akhtar (1975); Bonar (1929); Davis (2001); Dorfman (1989); Hagemann (1998); H.G. Johnson (1949); Kates (1998); Kurz (1998); Mclachlan (1999); Peach (1990); Sowell (1963, 1972, 1974). 4. On money and banking, see also Ahiakpor (1982, 1985); Akhtar (1975); Andrews (2000); Arnon (1987, 1989; 2011); Blaug (1996); Bonar (1896); Carr and Ahiakpor (1982); Davis (2001); Deleplace (2001); Erdös (1972); Feavearyear (1931); Fetter (1965); Glasner (1985); J. Hollander (1911a); S. Hollander (1979); Humphrey (1990); Kojima (1951); Laidler (1987); Marcuzzo and Rosselli (1991, 1994); Mason (1957); Milberg (1994); O’Brien (2012); Peake (1978, 1982); Rosselli (2008); Sayers (1953); Schwartz (1987); Takenaga (2011); Viner (1933). 5. On machinery, see also Barkai (1986); Barton (1817); Beach (1971); Berg (1980); Claeys and Kerr (1981); Davis (1989); Eltis (1985); Femminis and Notes 215 Salanti (1995); Ferguson (1973); Hagemann (2000); Hansson (1983); Hicks (1971); Hollander (1971); Jonung (1981); Kurz (1984, 1998, 2010a); Meacci (1985); Negishi (1990); Samuelson (1988, 1989); Sotiroff (1953); Uchiyama (2000); Wicksell (1981 [1923]). 6 Ricardo on Economic Policy 1. On policy issues, see also Barkai (1986); Barton (1817); Beach (1971); Berg (1980); Claeys and Kerr (1981); Davis (1989); Eltis (1985); Femminis and Salanti (1995); Ferguson (1973); Hagemann (2009); Hansson (1983); Hicks (1971); Hollander (1971); Jonung (1981); Kurz (1984, 1998, 2010a); Meacci (1985); Negishi (1990); Samuelson (1988, 1989); Sotiroff (1953); Uchiyama (2000); Wicksell (1923). 2. On fiscal policy, see Abel (1987); Akerlof (2007); Anderson and Tollison (1986); Akerlof 2007; Barro (1974, 1976); Bordo and White (1991); Carr and Ahiakpor (1982); Churchman (1995, 1999, 2001); Dome (2003); Dooley (1989); Eagly (1983); Feldstein (1976); Fetter (1980); Gottlieb (1953); Mair and Damania (1988); P.K. O’Brien (1988); Ricciuti (2003); and Tullio (1989). 3. On Ricardian equivalence, see the survey article by Ricciuti (2003). 4. On monetary policy, see Arnon (1998; 2011); Bonar (1896, 1923); Capie (2002); Deleplace and Sigot (2012); Duffy (1982); Fearvearyear (1931); Fetter (1965); Maital and Haswell (1977); Perlman (1986); Schwartz (1987); and Silberling (1924). 7 Editors and Critics 1. See also Arrow (1991); Blaug (1958); Camp (1918); De Marchi (1970); Fetter (1969); Gilbert (1996); J.H. Hollander (1904); S. Hollander (1977b); Hutchison (1952, 1994b); Johnson (1993); Maneschi (1990); Maneschi and Thweatt (1983); Peach (1993); Robertson (1957); Rutherford (1986); Scazzeri (1988); West (1982). 2. See also Bailey (1825); Berg (1975); Checkland (1949); Cochrane (1970); De Marchi (1970); De Vivo (1984, 1985); Fetter (1969); Gehrke (2000); Hansson (1983); J. Hollander (1910, 1911b); S. Hollander (1980b); Hunt (1979); Johnson, Haney and Taylor (1911); Knight (1935); Kriesler (1984); Kurz (1995); Kurz and Salvadori (2002); Mitchell (1929); O’Brien (1970); Ohlin (1935); Pashkoff (2005); Patten (1893); Reich (1980); Scazzeri (1987); Skourtos (1986); Tucker (1961); Turner (1912); Viner (1933); Whewell (1831); Wicksell (1923). 3. See also Ashley (1891); Bonar (1911); Collet (1936); Dmitriev (1974); Dunbar (1887); Gonner (1890); Hayek (1942, 1969); Hollander (1910, 1911b); Johnson, Haney and Taylor (1911); Knight (1935); Kurz (1995); MacDonald (1912); Mitchell (1929); Patten (1893); Seligman (1911); Skourtos (1986); Zamagni (1987, 1994). 4. See also Brander and Taylor (1998); Devi (1977); Grabowski and Shields (1989); Harinarayana (1977); Mishra (1977); Naimuddin (1977); Prasad (1977); Ranadive (1977); Roy (1977); Roychowdhury (1977); and Shammugasundaram (1977). 216 Notes 8 The Three Ricardos 1. See also Baumol (2001); Bell (1907); De Brunhoff (1973); De Vivo (1982, 1984); Garegnani (1984); Gordon (1983); Henry ( 1982– 3); Hollander (2000); Hunt (1977); King (1979); Kurz (1998); Kurz and Mongiovi (2002); Napoleoni (1975); Oakley (1985); Pasinetti (1982); Pilling (1972); Reich (1980); Steedman (1982); Tucker (1961); and Wolff, Callari and Roberts (1984). 2. See also Bell (1907); Berg (1981); Casarosa (1974, 1978, 1982, 1985); Forget (1990); Forget and Peart (2001); Garegnani (1982, 1983a, 1983b); Gibbard (1994); Gordon (1983); Grampp (1981); Groenewegen (1995); Hicks and Hollander (1977); Hollander (1982a, 1982b, 1982c, 1982d, 1983b, 1990b, 1995, 1998, 2000 2007); Kurz and Salvadori (1992, 1998a); Lapidus and Sigot (2001); Maneschi (1992b); Mongiovi (1994); Morishima (1989); Moss (1979, 1982); O’Brien (1981, 1982); Peach (1981, 1986a, 1988, 1990, 2001); Porta (1985); Roncaglia (1982a, 1982b); Samuelson (1980); Stigler (1981, 1990); Thweatt (1980); Tosato (1985); Witztum (1990); Young ( 1982– 3). 3. See also Bharadwaj (1983a, 1983b, 1988, 1989); Bidard (2011); Blaug (2002); Ciccone, Gehrke and Mongiovi (2011); De Vivo (1996); Dmitriev (1974);
Load more

Recommended publications
  • “Bad” Greed from the Enlightenment to Thorstein Veblen (1857-1929)1 Erik S
    real-world economics review, issue no. 63 subscribe for free Civilizing capitalism: “good” and “bad” greed from the enlightenment to Thorstein Veblen (1857-1929)1 Erik S. Reinert [Tallinn University of Technology, Estonia and Norway] Copyright: Erik S. Reinert, 2013 You may post comments on this paper at http://rwer.wordpress.com/2013/03/25/rwer-issue-63/ As we look over the country today we see two classes of people. The excessively rich and the abject poor, and between them is a gulf ever deepening, ever widening, and the ranks of the poor are continually being recruited from a third class, the well-to-do, which class is rapidly disappearing and being absorbed by the very poor. Milford Wriarson Howard (1862-1937), in The American Plutocracy, 1895. This paper argues for important similarities between today’s economic situation and the picture painted above by Milford Howard, a member of the US Senate at the time he wrote The American Plutocracy. This was the time, the 1880s and 1890s, when a combination of Manchester Liberalism – a logical extension of Ricardian economics – and Social Darwinism – promoted by the exceedingly influential UK philosopher Herbert Spencer – threatened completely to take over economic thought and policy on both sides of the Atlantic. At the same time, the latter half of the 19th century was marred by financial crises and social unrest. The national cycles of boom and bust were not as globally synchronized as they later became, but they were frequent both in Europe and in the United States. Activist reformer Ida Tarbell probably exaggerated when she recalled that in the US “the eighties dripped with blood”, but a growing gulf between a small and opulent group of bankers and industrialists produced social unrest and bloody labour struggles.
    [Show full text]
  • Redalyc.Theory of Money of David Ricardo
    Lecturas de Economía ISSN: 0120-2596 [email protected] Universidad de Antioquia Colombia Takenaga, Susumu Theory of Money of David Ricardo: Quantity Theory and Theory of Value Lecturas de Economía, núm. 59, julio-diciembre, 2003, pp. 73-126 Universidad de Antioquia .png, Colombia Available in: http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=155218004003 How to cite Complete issue Scientific Information System More information about this article Network of Scientific Journals from Latin America, the Caribbean, Spain and Portugal Journal's homepage in redalyc.org Non-profit academic project, developed under the open access initiative . El carro del heno, 1500 Hieronymus Bosch –El Bosco– Jerónimo, ¿vos cómo lo ves?, 2002 Theory of Money of David Ricardo: Quantity Theory and Theory of Value Susumu Takenaga Lecturas de Economía –Lect. Econ.– No. 59. Medellín, julio - diciembre 2003, pp. 73-126 Theory of Money of David Ricardo : Quantity Theory and Theory of Value Susumu Takenaga Lecturas de Economía, 59 (julio-diciembre, 2003), pp.73-126 Resumen: En lo que es necesario enfatizar, al caracterizar la teoría cuantitativa de David Ricardo, es en que ésta es una teoría de determinación del valor del dinero en una situación particular en la cual se impide que el dinero, sin importar cual sea su forma, entre y salga libremente de la circulación. Para Ricardo, la regulación del valor del dinero por su cantidad es un caso particular en el cual el ajuste del precio de mercado al precio natural requiere un largo periodo de tiempo. La determinación cuantitativa es completamente inadmisible, pero solo cuando el período de observación es más corto que el de ajuste.
    [Show full text]
  • David Ricardo's Contribution to the Constitution of The
    David Ricardo’s Contribution to the Constitution of the Canon of Ricardian Economics: A Reconsideration of 1970’s Interpretations of the 1815 Debate André Lapidus, Nathalie Sigot To cite this version: André Lapidus, Nathalie Sigot. David Ricardo’s Contribution to the Constitution of the Canon of Ricardian Economics: A Reconsideration of 1970’s Interpretations of the 1815 Debate. Evelyn L. Forget and Sandra Peart. Reflections on the Classical Canon in Economics, Routledge, pp.270-289, 2001. hal-00344895 HAL Id: hal-00344895 https://hal-paris1.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00344895 Submitted on 6 Dec 2008 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. David Ricardo’s Contribution to the Constitution of the Canon of Ricardian Economics: A Reconsideration of 1970’s Interpretations of the 1815 Debate André Lapidus * Nathalie Sigot * In Evelyn L. Forget and Sandra Peart (eds), Reflections on the Classical Canon in Economics, London and New York: Routledge, 2001 * Centre d’Histoire de la Pensée Economique, University of Paris I Panthéon - Sorbonne - 106, bd de l’Hôpital - 75647 Paris Cedex 13 - France. E-mails: [email protected] and [email protected].
    [Show full text]
  • The Economists' Quartet - a Game, Not a Theory
    A Service of Leibniz-Informationszentrum econstor Wirtschaft Leibniz Information Centre Make Your Publications Visible. zbw for Economics Gruescu, Sandra; Thomas, Niels Peter Working Paper The Economists' Quartet - A Game, not a Theory Darmstadt Discussion Papers in Economics, No. 109 Provided in Cooperation with: Darmstadt University of Technology, Department of Law and Economics Suggested Citation: Gruescu, Sandra; Thomas, Niels Peter (2002) : The Economists' Quartet - A Game, not a Theory, Darmstadt Discussion Papers in Economics, No. 109, Technische Universität Darmstadt, Department of Law and Economics, Darmstadt This Version is available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/84840 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. personal and scholarly purposes. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle You are not to copy documents for public or commercial Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, If the documents have been made available under an Open gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. www.econstor.eu Darmstadt Discussion Papers in Economics The Economists' Quartet A Game, not a Theory Sandra Gruescu and Niels Peter Thomas No.
    [Show full text]
  • 1. the Damnation of Economics
    Notes 1. The Damnation of Economics 1. One example of vice-regal patronage of anti-economics is Canada’s ‘Governor General’s Award for Non-Fiction’. In 1995 this honour was bestowed upon John Raulston Saul’s anti-economic polemic The Unconscious Civilization (published in 1996). A taste of Saul’s wisdom: ‘Over the last quarter-century economics has raised itself to the level of a scientific profession and more or less foisted a Nobel Prize in its own honour onto the Nobel committee thanks to annual financing from a bank. Yet over the same 25 years, economics has been spectacularly unsuc- cessful in its attempts to apply its models and theories to the reality of our civili- sation’ (Saul 1996, p. 4). See Pusey (1991) and Cox (1995) for examples of patronage of anti-economics by Research Councils and Broadcasting Corporations. 2. Another example of economists’ ‘stillness’: the economists of 1860 did not join the numerous editorial rebukes of Ruskin’s anti-economics tracts (Anthony, 1983). 3. The anti-economist is not to be contrasted with the economist. An economist (that is, a person with a specialist knowledge of economics) may be an anti- economist. The true obverse of anti-economist is ‘philo-economist’: someone who holds that economics is a boon. 4. One may think of economics as a disease (as the anti-economist does), or one may think of economics as diseased. Mark Blaug: ‘Modern economics is “sick” . To para- phrase the title of a popular British musical: “No Reality, Please. We’re Economists”’ (Blaug 1998, p.
    [Show full text]
  • GEORGE J. STIGLER Graduate School of Business, University of Chicago, 1101 East 58Th Street, Chicago, Ill
    THE PROCESS AND PROGRESS OF ECONOMICS Nobel Memorial Lecture, 8 December, 1982 by GEORGE J. STIGLER Graduate School of Business, University of Chicago, 1101 East 58th Street, Chicago, Ill. 60637, USA In the work on the economics of information which I began twenty some years ago, I started with an example: how does one find the seller of automobiles who is offering a given model at the lowest price? Does it pay to search more, the more frequently one purchases an automobile, and does it ever pay to search out a large number of potential sellers? The study of the search for trading partners and prices and qualities has now been deepened and widened by the work of scores of skilled economic theorists. I propose on this occasion to address the same kinds of questions to an entirely different market: the market for new ideas in economic science. Most economists enter this market in new ideas, let me emphasize, in order to obtain ideas and methods for the applications they are making of economics to the thousand problems with which they are occupied: these economists are not the suppliers of new ideas but only demanders. Their problem is comparable to that of the automobile buyer: to find a reliable vehicle. Indeed, they usually end up by buying a used, and therefore tested, idea. Those economists who seek to engage in research on the new ideas of the science - to refute or confirm or develop or displace them - are in a sense both buyers and sellers of new ideas. They seek to develop new ideas and persuade the science to accept them, but they also are following clues and promises and explorations in the current or preceding ideas of the science.
    [Show full text]
  • HISTORY of ECONOMIC THOUGHT a Selected Bibliography John F
    HISTORY OF ECONOMIC THOUGHT A Selected Bibliography John F. Henry Department of Economics California State University, Sacramento A. Texts and Commentaries of a General Nature (The following list is not meant to be exhaustive, but does represent general accounts from varying points of view. The student should also examine the bibliographies in these works, particularly that in Spiegel. There are also a number of series studies now available, notably from Edward Elgar publisher: Perspectives in the History of Economic Thought which features papers presented at the annual History of Economics Society meeting (9 vols); Pioneers in Economics, Marc Blaug, ed., which contains papers on particular economists (currently at 46 titles); Schools of Thought in Economics, Marc Blaug, general ed. which contains (currently 11) volumes of essays on particular general approaches in economics. Routledge is publishing a Critical Assessments series, edited by John Wood featuring articles written on specific economists: currently, volumes on Joan Robinson, Leontief, Say, and Pareto are published. Routledge also publishes a “Library of 20th Century Economists,” organized around themes–The Chicago Tradition, Socialism and the Market, Origins of Macroeconomics, etc. And, the firm has a “Critical Reviews” and Critical Responses” series. Macmillan has a new series on Contemporary Economists, edited by John Pheby. Finally, Pickering and Chatto (UK) is publishing series on various topics that collect articles written over a several hundred year period: Hageman, H., ed., Business Cycle Theory (4 vols); Emmett, R., Reactions to the South Sea Bubble, the Mississippi Scheme, and the Tulip Mania Affair (3 vols); White, L, ed., The History of Gold and Silver (3vols); O’Brien, D., The History of Taxation (8 vols); Bridel, P., The Foundations of Price Theory (6 vols); Barber, W., et al., eds, Early American Thought (6 vols); Samuels, W., ed., Law and Economics (2 vols); Capie, F., ed., History of Banking, 1650-1850 (10 vols); Ross, D., History of Banking II, 1844-1959 (10 vols).
    [Show full text]
  • Legitimacy, Globally: the Incoherence of Free Trade Practice, Global Economics and Their Governing Principles of Political Economy
    Cleveland State University EngagedScholarship@CSU Law Faculty Articles and Essays Faculty Scholarship 2001 Legitimacy, Globally: The Incoherence of Free Trade Practice, Global Economics and their Governing Principles of Political Economy Michael Henry Davis Cleveland State University, [email protected] Dana Neacsu Follow this and additional works at: https://engagedscholarship.csuohio.edu/fac_articles Part of the International Law Commons, and the International Trade Law Commons How does access to this work benefit ou?y Let us know! Original Citation Michael Henry Davis, Legitimacy, Globally: The Incoherence of Free Trade Practice, Global Economics and their Governing Principles of Political Economy 69 University of Missouri at Kansas City Law Review 733 (2001) This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Scholarship at EngagedScholarship@CSU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Law Faculty Articles and Essays by an authorized administrator of EngagedScholarship@CSU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. +(,121/,1( Citation: 69 UMKC L. Rev. 733 2000-2001 Content downloaded/printed from HeinOnline (http://heinonline.org) Thu Sep 27 14:40:03 2012 -- Your use of this HeinOnline PDF indicates your acceptance of HeinOnline's Terms and Conditions of the license agreement available at http://heinonline.org/HOL/License -- The search text of this PDF is generated from uncorrected OCR text. -- To obtain permission to use this article beyond the scope of your HeinOnline license, please use: https://www.copyright.com/ccc/basicSearch.do? &operation=go&searchType=0 &lastSearch=simple&all=on&titleOrStdNo=0047-7575 LEGITIMACY, GLOBALLY: THE INCOHERENCE OF FREE TRADE PRACTICE, GLOBAL ECONOMICS AND THEIR GOVERNING PRINCIPLES OF POLITICAL ECONOMY Michael H.
    [Show full text]
  • Working Paper No. 40, the Rise and Fall of Georgist Economic Thinking
    Portland State University PDXScholar Working Papers in Economics Economics 12-15-2019 Working Paper No. 40, The Rise and Fall of Georgist Economic Thinking Justin Pilarski Portland State University Follow this and additional works at: https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/econ_workingpapers Part of the Economic History Commons, and the Economic Theory Commons Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Citation Details Pilarski, Justin "The Rise and Fall of Georgist Economic Thinking, Working Paper No. 40", Portland State University Economics Working Papers. 40. (15 December 2019) i + 16 pages. This Working Paper is brought to you for free and open access. It has been accepted for inclusion in Working Papers in Economics by an authorized administrator of PDXScholar. Please contact us if we can make this document more accessible: [email protected]. The Rise and Fall of Georgist Economic Thinking Working Paper No. 40 Authored by: Justin Pilarski A Contribution to the Working Papers of the Department of Economics, Portland State University Submitted for: EC456 “American Economic History” 15 December 2019; i + 16 pages Prepared for Professor John Hall Abstract: This inquiry seeks to establish that Henry George’s writings advanced a distinct theory of political economy that benefited from a meteoric rise in popularity followed by a fall to irrelevance with the turn of the 20th century. During the depression decade of the 1870s, the efficacy of the laissez-faire economic system came into question, during this same timeframe neoclassical economics supplanted classical political economy. This inquiry considers both of George’s key works: Progress and Poverty [1879] and The Science of Political Economy [1898], establishing the distinct components of Georgist economic thought.
    [Show full text]
  • Classical Liberalism in Italian Economic Thought, from the Time of Unification · Econ Journal Watch : Italy,Classical Liberalis
    Discuss this article at Journaltalk: http://journaltalk.net/articles/5933 ECON JOURNAL WATCH 14(1) January 2017: 22–54 Classical Liberalism in Italian Economic Thought, from the Time of Unification Alberto Mingardi1 LINK TO ABSTRACT This paper offers an account of Italians who have advanced liberal ideas and sensibilities, with an emphasis on individual freedom in the marketplace, since the time of Italy’s unification. We should be mindful that Italy has always had a vein of liberal thought. But this gold mine of liberalism was seldom accessed by political actors, and since 1860 liberalism has been but one thin trace in Italy’s mostly illiberal political thought and culture. The leading representatives of Italian liberalism since 1860 are little known internationally, with the exception of Vilfredo Pareto (1848–1923). And yet their work influenced the late James M. Buchanan and the development of public choice economics.2 Scholars such as Bruno Leoni (1913–1967) joined—and influenced— liberals around the world, and they continue to have an impact on Italy today. Besides their scholarship, all the liberal authors mentioned here share a constant willingness to enter the public debate.3 Viewed retrospectively they appear a pugnacious lot, even if not highly successful in influencing public policy. The standout is Luigi Einaudi (1874–1961), at once a scholar and journalist who also became a leading political figure in the period after World War II. 1. Istituto Bruno Leoni, 10123 Turin, Italy. I am grateful to Jane Shaw Stroup for valuable editorial feed- back. I also wish to thank Enrico Colombatto and three anonymous referees for their helpful comments.
    [Show full text]
  • David Ricardo's Comparative Advantage and Developing Countries
    David Ricardo’s Comparative Advantage and Developing Countries: Myth and Reality Kalim Siddiqui1 In International Critical Thought, Vol 8, issue 3. Abstract This article examines David Ricardo’s trade theory, which emphasises that if protection is removed, resources would be expected to move away from high cost to low cost products and as a result productivity would rise. His comparative advantage trade theory advocates in favour of a free trade, the argument implied generally to defend laissez faire. This study aims to critically analyse the theoretical and empirical basis for trade liberalisation. It also discusses the mainstream arguments relating to static and dynamic gains from trade liberalisation which seem to be based on weak theoretical and empirical grounds. The study analyses the phenomenon from a historical materialist perspective. It will also briefly discuss free trade and its impact on the industrial and agricultural sectors and how the performance of both sectors could have a long-term impact on local industrialisation, food security, employment and well-being of the people in developing countries. This article builds on this political economy and looks in particular at free trade policies and their impact on the economies of developing countries. Free trade theory, which has wide support among international financial institutions, namely the IMF, World Bank, WTO (World Trade Organisation) draws on David Ricardo’s theory. The study has argued that free trade policy will deepen further the process of uneven development and unequal exchange. The study concludes that free trade policy will deepen further the process of uneven development and unequal exchange. Keywords: Comparative Advantage, developing countries, capitalist expansion, WTO and free trade.
    [Show full text]
  • Part II Core Theory: Classic International Trade Theories
    Part II Core Theory: Classic International Trade Theories Table of Contents Part II Core Theory: Classic International Trade Theories.........................2 1. Mercantilism ...........................................................................................2 The Classical World of David Ricardo and Comparative (Chapter 3).......3 Advantage ...................................................................................................3 Absolute Advantage and Comparative Advantage .....................................5 Problems of Using Absolute Advantage to Guide Allocation of Tasks......8 Ricardian Comparative Advantage.............................................................9 Resource Constraints: ...............................................................................18 Complete Specialization: ..........................................................................20 Technological take over by less developed countries...............................21 Production Possibilities: ...........................................................................21 Complete versus Partial Specialization ....................................................23 The case of a small country ......................................................................24 Some concluding observations .................................................................25 2. Extensions and Tests of the Classical Model of Trade (chapter 4).......26 2.1 The classical model in money terms...................................................27
    [Show full text]