Jim,
I also fully agree that later Marxists certainly did
have bunching theories of cycles tied to investments
in specific technologies. I would note that the inspiration
for Mandel's arguments came from Trotsky and Parvus.
Barkley Rosser
-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Devine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 5:17 PM
Subject: [PEN-L:7614] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: recent economic trends
>At 01:29 PM 1/31/01 -0500, you wrote:
>> Marx had a bunching theory tied to replacement
>>wave cycles a la the sort of thing now advocated
>>by Kydland and Prescott ("real business cycles").
>>The latter even attribute their beginnings to "technology
>>shocks."
>
>But Marx emphasized the demand side (i.e., accumulation), whereas "real
>business cycles" are on the supply side.
>
>>But, did Marx tie the original bunching to a
>>wave of investment in a particular technology? Where
>>did he do so if he did? Schumpeter certainly did,
>>although I would agree he was not the first.
>
>I don't think Marx linked the bunching of investment to investment in a
>particular technology, but I'm willing to be convinced otherwise. Marxists
>such as Mandel or Baran & Sweezy have done so...
>
>Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] & http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
>
>
