Neoclassical economics
Please post your comments and suggestions for this article.
Comment by David Harrell on September 23rd, 2009 at 3:56 pm
In perusing your account of neoclassical economics, I see no mention of Henry George as the last great classical economist. You also should avail yourselves of the critique of neoclassicalism offered by Georgist economists. Example:
Neo-classical Economics as a Stratagem
against Henry George
http://www.masongaffney.org/publications/K1Neo-classical_Stratagem.CV.pdf
Comment by Jennifer Tanabe on September 30th, 2009 at 6:28 pm
Thank you for your feedback. However, I find it hard to agree that Henry George was “the last great classical economist,” or why that should be stated in the article on “Neoclassical Economics.” I agree, though, that Henry George does deserve mention in the article on “History of Economic Thought,” and I will work on giving him appropriate mention in that article. Thank you again for your support in improving the New World Encyclopedia.
Comment by laurie on May 25th, 2013 at 11:23 am
“Marx’s development of a theory of exploitation from the labor theory of value, which had been taken as fundamental by economists since John Locke coincided with labor theory’s abandonment. The new orthodoxy became the theory of marginal utility”
Because most bourgeois political economists realized Marx was right (the contradictions inherent in the Capitalist mode of production were undeniable) so they used ‘marginal’ utility as a kind of apologetic for capitalism.
Comment by Jennifer Tanabe on May 25th, 2013 at 4:06 pm
Thank you, Laurie, for taking the time to comment. While Marx made significant contributions to the labor theory of value, his theory, like all economic theories of value, is also inadequate to explain the complexities of value and market prices. The theory of marginal utility addresses one of the more subjective aspects of price, but is also incomplete in its analysis.
Leave a Reply
