Sabri, Marx's theory in question here is about value -- a form of social relations peculiar to capitalism. As such, it would not have relevance under socialism.
Sabri Oncu wrote: > Michael wrote: > > > Recasting Marx in algebraic, mathematical, > > or precise numerical form, seems a bit foreign > > to his overall project, which his understanding > > the nature of capitalist society and the weaknesses > > that will lead to the creation of a socialist state. > > Let us assume for a while that we somehow managed to replace the > capitalist society with a socialist one. Wouldn't we still need > Marxian or otherwise economic models, mathematics, econometrics > and the like to understand/explain the present and make > predictions about the future? > > Why should we avoid mathematical formulations of those parts of > the Marxian theory that can be formulated mathematically if it > can help us to explain the present and predict/forecast the > future "better"? If it is indeed "better", don't we need them > both now and then? If so why not start now? > > Sabri > > P.S: I looked at Roemer's "Analytical foundations of Marxian > economic theory" but was not particularly impressed. It looks > like Varian's "Microeconomic analysis". By the way, Varian is > definitely better than Roemer when it comes to using TeX, that > software mathematicians use to write their papers and books. -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University [EMAIL PROTECTED] Chico, CA 95929 530-898-5321 fax 530-898-5901
