Some Unsettled Issues in a Second Phase of the Cambridge-Cambridge Controversy

Andrés Lazzarini

Review of Radical Political Economics, 2015, vol. 47, issue 2, 256-273

Abstract: The aim of this paper is to clear up some issues in a second phase of the Cambridge-Cambridge capital theory controversies, when the neoclassical argument was chiefly conducted in terms of the Walrasian specification of capital in intertemporal and temporary general equilibrium models. It is held that the response by the neoclassical side in that phase has not been as satisfactory to rebut the implications of reswitching and capital reversing as some neoclassical scholars have argued. The reason for this can be traced in the overlooking of the implications of the redefinition of equilibrium implied in those models.

Keywords: Cambridge Controversy; capital; equilibrium; marginalist theory; Walras; neo-Walrasian models (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: A10 B21 B22 B24 B40 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2015
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (3)

Downloads: (external link)
http://rrp.sagepub.com/content/47/2/256.abstract (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:sae:reorpe:v:47:y:2015:i:2:p:256-273

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Review of Radical Political Economics from Union for Radical Political Economics
Bibliographic data for series maintained by SAGE Publications ().