Thank you very much. I don't think that he uses physics too much, except to say that physics has conservation principles; economists doesn't
On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 10:14 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > > * *"michael perelman" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > I hope that the title explains the contents > > > > http://michaelperelman.wordpress.com/2013/10/05/beijing-paper-constant-capital-accumulation-sustainability-and-economic-theory/ > > I think that you nailed the problem when you wrote: > > The temporary solution in the 19th century American economy was a wave > of mergers as a means > > of avoiding competition. However, the mergers created new problems. > For example, corporations, > > freed from competitive pressures, did little to advance technical > change, which put an end to the period of rapid progress. > > I would like you to explain why capital doesn't do enough to advance > technical change, and how > socialism can do better. > > Georgescu-Roegen's work seems to be using physics as a model for > economics, but I think that > such analogies are misleading. > > -- > Ron > > > _______________________________________________ > pen-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l > > -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 530 898 5321 fax 530 898 5901 http://michaelperelman.wordpress.com
_______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
