Marx’s Reproduction Schemes and Smith’s Dogma

  • Fred Moseley

Abstract

The best-known part of Volume Two of Capital is the reproduction schemes in Part Three. Marx’s reproduction schemes have been widely interpreted to be essentially the same as Leontief input-output tables, or the technology matrices in Sraffian theory or in neo-classical growth theory (for example, Lange, 1969; Morishima, 1973; Howard and King, 1985; Gehrke and Kurz, 1995). These technology matrices consist of physical quantities of inputs and outputs for the various sectors in the economy. According to this interpretation, Marx’s reproduction tables also consist fundamentally of physical quantities of inputs and outputs, which are aggregated into departments by means of labor values. The main purpose of Marx’s reproduction tables, according to this interpretation, is to analyze the conditions for balanced growth, or the proportions between the physical inputs and outputs of the different sectors of the economy which are necessary for balanced growth to occur.

Keywords

Omic Alan 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Clarke, Simon (1994) Marx’s Theory of Crisis, Macmillan, London.Google Scholar
  2. Foley, Duncan (1986) Understanding ‘Capital’, Harvard University Press, Cambridge Mass.Google Scholar
  3. Gehrke, Christian and Heinz Kurz (1995) ‘Karl Marx on the Physiocrats’, European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, 1.Google Scholar
  4. Heinrich, Michael (1989) ‘Capital in General’ and the Structure of Marx’s Capital’, Capital & Class, no. 38, Summer: 63–79.Google Scholar
  5. Howard, M.C. and J.E. King (1985) The Political Economy of Marx, 2nd ed, New York University Press, New York.Google Scholar
  6. Korsch, Karl (1938) Karl Marx, Chapman Hall, London; reprinted Russell, New York 1963.Google Scholar
  7. Lange, Oscar (1969) Theory of Reproduction and Accumulation, Pergamon, New York.Google Scholar
  8. Marx, Karl (1956/1963) Theories of Surplus-value, Volume 1, Progress Publishers, Moscow.Google Scholar
  9. Marx, Karl (1939/1973) Grundrisse: Introduction to the Critique of Political Economy, Penguin Books, Harmondsworth.Google Scholar
  10. Marx, Karl (1867/1977) Capital, Volume 1, Random House, New York.Google Scholar
  11. Marx, Karl (1884/1978) Capital, Volume 2, Random House, New York.Google Scholar
  12. Marx, Karl (1894/1981) Capital, Volume 3, Random House, New York.Google Scholar
  13. Marx, Karl and Frederick Engels (1975) Selected Correspondence, Progress Publishers, Moscow.Google Scholar
  14. Marx, Karl and Frederick Engels (1989) Collected Works, Volume 31, International Publishers, New York.Google Scholar
  15. Moseley, Fred (1993) ‘Marx’s Logical Method and the “Transformation Problem”’, in F. Moseley (ed.), Marx’s Method in ‘Capital’: A Reexamination, Humanities Press, Atlantic Heights, NJ.Google Scholar
  16. Moseley, Fred (1995) ‘Capital in General and Marx’s Logical Method: A Response to Heinrich’s Critique’, Capital & Class, no. 56, Summer: 5–48.Google Scholar
  17. Moseley, Fred (1997) ‘The Return to Marx: Retreat or Advance?’, in Alan Freeman (ed.), The New Value Controversy and the Foundations of Economics, Edward Elgar, Aldershot.Google Scholar
  18. Morishima, M. (1973) Marx’s Economics: A Dual Theory of Value and Growth, Cambridge University Press, London.Google Scholar
  19. Rosdolsky, Roman (1968) The Making of Marx’s Capital, Pluto Press, London.Google Scholar
  20. Rubin, I.I. (1972) Essays on Marx’s Theory of Value, Black and Red Press, Detroit.Google Scholar
  21. Sweezy, Paul (1968) The Theory of Capitalist Development, Monthly Review Press, New York.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Palgrave Macmillan, a division of Macmillan Publishers Limited 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • Fred Moseley

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations