The pure logic of value, profit, interest
Standard economic models are based on axioms that epitomize the fundamental behavioral assumptions. This approach is not conductive to convincing results. The suggested change of perspective is guided by the question: what is the minimum set of propositions for the consistent reconstruction of the evolving money economy? We start with three structural axioms and determine their real world implications. The claim of generality entails that it should be possible to demonstrate that well-understood parts of theoretical economics fit consistently into the structural axiomatic framework. We focus here on the classical theory of value as expounded by J. S. Mill.
|Date of creation:||11 May 2011|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Ludwigstraße 33, D-80539 Munich, Germany|
Web page: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de
More information through EDIRC
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Kirman, Alan, 1989. "The Intrinsic Limits of Modern Economic Theory: The Emperor Has No Clothes," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 99(395), pages 126-39, Supplemen.
- Buiter, Willem H, 1980. "Walras' Law and All That: Budget Constraints and Balance Sheet Constraints in Period Models and Continuous Time Models," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 21(1), pages 1-16, February.
- T.A. Boylan & P.F. O'Gorman, 2007. "Axiomatization And Formalism In Economics," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(3), pages 426-446, 07.
- Hollander, Samuel, 1977. "Adam Smith and the Self-Interest Axiom," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 20(1), pages 133-52, April.
- Frank Ackerman, 2001. "Still dead after all these years: interpreting the failure of general equilibrium theory," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(2), pages 119-139.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:30853. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Joachim Winter)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.