Where did Hayek use that metaphor? Also, I discussed the overlap between H*yek and Marx before in my Marx book, but the overlap I emphasized was in the relationship between crises and problems in coordination via the market.
Rakesh Bhandari wrote: > > The theoretical point here is--to use Hayek's metaphor--that the > continuous flow of the river of investment can vary independently of > the level of the tide (sales of final goods) at the mouth. The upper > reaches of the volume of water is affected by the immediate flow of > the tributaries to the maintstream (variations in new and replacement > technology). In any given period there is no obvious correspondence > bttween changes in the upper reaches and the sale of final goods; nor > between the sale of final goods and employment. Moreover, as Marx > first and Hayek later recognized, it is generally the case that in a > slump the revival of final demand is an effect rather than a cause of > revival in the upper reaches of the stream of production. > > > There is also the question of the possible overlap in the > Perelman-Brenner critique of Keynesianism and the Hayekian one! > > Rakesh -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
