Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-g8tfn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-31T04:14:15.311Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Transformation Problem: Exposition and Appraisal

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 June 2009

Murray Wolfson
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Every theory of value has to perform certain tasks. In the narrowest sense, it must explain ratios of exchange on the market. But it must also give an account of social costs and benefits, and their distribution among individuals and groups. Value theory must relate human beings to the physical and biological realities. It must explain the relations between persons and groups. In fulfilling all these tasks, value theory reflects philosophical beliefs about how human beings perceive and react to nature and to each other.

Information

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of the History of Economic Thought , Volume 12 , Issue 2 , Fall 1990 , pp. 179 - 195
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1990

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Becker, G.S. 1988. “On the Economics of the Family: Reply to a Skeptic,” American Economic Review, 78, 06, 514–19.Google Scholar
Böhm-Bawerk, E. von. 1896. Karl Marx and the Close of His System, translated by Sweezy, P.M.; reprint, Augustus M. Kelley, New York, 1949.Google Scholar
Bortkiewicz, L. von. 1907. “On the Correction of Marx's Fundamental Theoretical Construction in the Third Volume of Capital,” Jahrbücher für Nationalökonomie und Statistik, in Böhm-Bawerk 1896, 198–221.Google Scholar
Goldberger, A.S. 1989. “Economic and Mechanical Models of Intergenerational Transmission,” American Economic Review, 79, 06, 504–13.Google Scholar
Gottheil, F.M. 1960. “Wages and Interest: A Modern Dissection of Marxian Economic Models: Comment,” American Economic Review, 50, 09, 715–19.Google Scholar
Gorbachev, M. 1987. Perestroika. New Thinking for Our Country and the World, Harper and Row, New York.Google Scholar
Koopmans, T. 1957. Three Essays on the State of Economic Science, McGraw Hill, New York.Google Scholar
Lavoie, D. 1986. “Marx, the Quantity Theory, and the Theory of Value,” History of Political Economy, 18, Spring, 155–70.Google Scholar
Marx, K. 1867. Capital: A Critical Analysis of Capitalist Production, 1, translated by Moore, S. and Aveling, E., Appleton and Company, Chicago, 1906; reprint, Modern Library, New York, n.d.Google Scholar
Marx, K.. 1885, 1894. Capital: A Critical Analysis of Capitalist Production, 2 and 3, Engels, F., ed., translated by Untermann, E., C.H. Kerr and Company, Chicago, 1909.Google Scholar
Morishima, M. 1973. Marx's Economics, A Dual Theory of Value and Growth, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England.Google Scholar
Okishio, N. 1963. “A Mathematical Note on Marxian Theorems,” Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv, 91, 287–98.Google Scholar
Reischauer, E. O. 1988. The Japanese Today, Belknap Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
Roemer, J. 1981. Analytical Foundations of Marxian Economic Theory. Cambridge University Press, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roemer, J.. 1986. Value, Exploitation and Class, Harwood Academic, New York.Google Scholar
Samuelson, P.A. 1957. “Wages and Interest: A Modern Dissection of Marxian Economic Models,” American Economic Review, 47, 12, 884–98.Google Scholar
Samuelson, P.A.. 1960. “Wages and Interest: A Modern Dissection of Marxian Economic Models: Reply,” American Economic Review, 50, 09, 719–21.Google Scholar
Samuelson, P.A.. 1971. “Understanding the Marxian Notion of Exploitation,” Journal of Economic Literature, 9, 03, 399–431.Google Scholar
Seton, F. 1957. “The Transformation Problem,” Review of Economic Studies, 25, June 149–60.Google Scholar
Sowell, T. 1960. “Marx's ‘Increasing Misery’ Doctrine,” American Economic Review, 50, 03, 111–20.Google Scholar
Stigler, G.F. and Becker, G.S.. 1977. “De Gustibus Non Est Disputandum,” American Economic Review, 67, 03, 76–90.Google Scholar
Sweezy, P.M. 1968. The Theory of Capitalist Development, Monthly Review, New York.Google Scholar
Winternitz, J. 1948. “Values and Prices: A Solution of the So-called Transformation Problem,” Economic Journal, 57, 06, 276–80.Google Scholar
Wolfson, M. 1966. A Reappraisal of Marxian Economics, Columbia University Press, New York.Google Scholar
Wolfson, M.. 1971. Karl Marx, Columbia University Press, New York.Google Scholar
Wolfson, M.. 1977. “The Empirical Content of the Labor Theory of Value,” Keio Economic Studies, 14, Spring, 67–84.Google Scholar
Wolfson, M.. 1988. “Comment: Marx, the Quantity Theory, and the Theory of Value,” History of Political Economy, 20, Winter, 137–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolfson, M.. 1990. “Perestroika and the Quest for Peace,” Defence Economics, 1, Spring, 221–32. Reprinted in Wolfson, , Essays in the Beginning and End of the Cold War, Macmillan, London, 1991.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolfson, M.. Orzech, Z.B., and Hanna, S.. 1985. “Karl Marx and the Depletion of Human Capital as an Open Access Resource,” History of Political Economy, 18, Fall, 497–514Google Scholar