Readers of the Bulletin will be aware of considerable past debate within the CSE on the definition and status of certain value categories. In Marx after Sraffa Ian Steedman argues, in part on the basis of points made in that discussion – in which he took a leading part – that all value categories constitute an obstacle to a scientific analysis of capitalism. This review article attempts a reply to his critique of value.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Eatwell, J., 1975, ‘Mr. Sraffa and the rate of exploitation’, Quarterly Journal of Economics.
2.
Fine, B. and Harris, L., 1976, ‘Controversial Issues in Marxist Economic Theory’, The Socialist Register.
3.
Mandel, E., 1973, ‘Value, Surplus Value, Profit, Prices of Production and Surplus Capital’, International, Vol. 2, No.1, Spring.
4.
Medio, A., 1972, ‘Profit and Surplus Value’ in Hunt, E. and Schwartz, J. ed. A Critique of Economic Theory, London, Penguin.
5.
Morishima, M., 1974, ‘Marx in the Light of Modern Economic Theory’, Econometrica.
6.
von Neumann, J., 1945-6, ‘A model of general economic equilibrium,’Review of Economic Studies
7.
Sraffa, P., 1972, Production of Commodities by Means of Commodities, London: Cambridge University Press.
8.
Steedman, I.1976, ‘Positive Profit With Negative Surplus Value: A Reply to Wolfstelter’, Economic Journal.
9.
Steedman, I.1977Marx after Sraffa, London; New Left Books.
