IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/rherxx/v77y2020i1p37-51.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Disputing the Correct Interpretation of Say’s Law: A Comment on Roy Grieve’s and Steven Kates’s Arguments

Author

Listed:
  • James C. W. Ahiakpor

Abstract

Steven Kates recently has been interpreting Say’s law of markets as equivalent to John Stuart Mill’s declaration in his fourth fundamental theorem respecting capital that ‘Demand for commodities is not demand for labour’. Kates’s interpretation distorts both Say’s own statement of the law of markets and the meaning of Mill’s fourth theorem. Roy Grieve correctly disputes Kates’s denial of Mill’s having employed the wages fund to illustrate the meaning of his controversial declaration. Citing some criticisms of the wages-fund doctrine, Grieve believes he has shown the error of Say’s Law. Both Grieve and Kates are mistaken in their principal arguments.

Suggested Citation

  • James C. W. Ahiakpor, 2020. "Disputing the Correct Interpretation of Say’s Law: A Comment on Roy Grieve’s and Steven Kates’s Arguments," History of Economics Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 77(1), pages 37-51, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:rherxx:v:77:y:2020:i:1:p:37-51
    DOI: 10.1080/10370196.2020.1784649
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/10370196.2020.1784649
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/10370196.2020.1784649?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:rherxx:v:77:y:2020:i:1:p:37-51. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/rher .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.