>destroyed neoclassical economics >destroyed marxism >destroyed

>>2754204
>Sraffa
>hated Italian cultural hegemony, communist "intellectual" who worked to undermine Italian commerce and culture
>Sraffa was born in Turin, Italy, to Angelo Sraffa (1865–1937) and Irma Sraffa (née Tivoli) (1873–1949) a wealthy Italian Jewish couple.
What a shocker
>Gramsci
>literally an Albanian living in Italy
>As a boy, Gramsci suffered from health problems, particularly a malformation of the spine that stunted his growth (his adult height was less than 5 feet)
Mussolini should have killed them both.

>>2754249
Sorry, this thread is about intellectual achievements, not things that trigger you (although the first part about sraffa is bullshit anyway).

>>2754270
Yea anon, worship your communist Jew and manlet Albanian and call anyone who derides it an anti-intellectual.

Childhood is thinking economics is worth studying.

Adulthood is realizing the works of Aquinas are all that matters.

>>2754312
If by worshiping you mean reading, sure. His economic work is completely apolitical so you're getting triggered about literally nothing. And yes, you are clearly an anti-intellectual. Now back to learning about sociopolitics through infopics, stormfag.

>>2754317
>Aristotelian theology
No thanks

>>2754363
There is no such thing as an apolitical economic work.

>>2754204
>created his own school of economics
>He only compiled Ricardo's works

Hmm

>>2754249
>Gramsci
didn't know he was Italian.

>>2754389
I disagree, but feel free to expand. Or even better, point to the political bias in http://www.nuevatribuna.es/media/nuevatribuna/files/2013/04/15/production_of_commodities_by_means_of_commodities.pdf

>>2754415
He was Albanian, living in Italy.
>>2754420
>best friends and collaborator with the head of the Italian Communist Party
>completely apolitical
I'll read it, but nonetheless you're purposefully obtuse and naive.

>>2754433
According to wiki his dad was an t Arbëreshë and his mom was an Italian.

File: kyenes%20teaser[1].jpg (893KB, 2060x1236px) Image search: [Google]

893KB, 2060x1236px

>any european economist other than this guy mattering

>>2754433
>I'll read it, but nonetheless you're purposefully obtuse and naive.
Don't be stupid, anon, being friends with gramsci doesn't magically make his work ideological. Is the theory of relativity socialist because einstein wrote "why socialism"? I don't know why people make these kind of stupid rationalizations when you can just prove your point directly if it was true.

>>2754521
But they were bff.

>>2754545
Economics =/= physics

>>2754560
Your deduction (something like if X is friends with Y, then X's work reflects Y's ideology) is obviously logically invalid in any case, I just used a particularly obvious example. But you've got Sraffa's magnum opus to prove your point now.

>>2754592
>but each commodity, which intially was distributed to the industries acdording to their needs, is found at the end of the year to be entirely concentrated in the hand's of the producer.

See, you are purposefully obtuse, economics can and do influence politics, culture, every aspect of mundane life. Globalism erodes at local culture, marxism erodes at class and the subsequent culture attached to it. Physics is only applicable to it's physical applications from engineering to mechanics. Don't discuss logic when you don't have a grasp on it, or even intuition.

>neo-ricardian destroys neo-classical economics
wut

>>2754686
Thats the fun thing about economics- it's mostly musings and theory. You can declare yourself a winner without proof.

>>2754672
Are you honestly retarded? The first chapter describes an economy in which the input is equal to the output, there is not profit. There is literally no assumption as to what happens to production, because production is just enough to restart the process of production. The quote you posted is saying that the initial input appears exactly the same as the output to the producer, you massive idiot, it's not some commentary on distribution as you seem to think. He later, when output > input, explains both the edge cases in which the level of wages depletes the profits and the opposite case to study how the relative prices and behave mathematically.

>Globalism erodes at local culture, marxism erodes at class and the subsequent culture attached to it.
And /pol/ erodes your brain to the point in which you can't think without retarded buzzwords and you frantically search an economics text for something to confirm your biases. We can't have a discussion on fucking neoricardian economics without you retarded troglodytes sperging about your conspiracies.

>>2754686
>>2754694
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambridge_capital_controversy

>>2754730
>And /pol/ erodes your brain to the point in which you can't think without retarded buzzwords and you frantically search an economics text for something to confirm your biases.

Irony the post anon, you already have.

>>2754733
why does neo-classical economics exclude Ricardo?
Not being cheeky, I genuinely don't know.

>>2754545
>Is the theory of relativity socialist
Sounds like Jewish science to me, so yes.

>>2754815
I don't understand the question. Are you asking why he isn't considered part of the neoclassical school? The terms refers to the syntheses that alfred marshall did of marginalists and classical economists, and the subsequent developments. Ricardo, being part of the classical economists, is not a marginalist and works under different assumptions or focuses on different issues in some cases.

>>2754877
That is the question, and that was a succinct answer.
Thank you.

>>2754884
You're welcome, anon.

>>2754204
Steedman didn't destroy Marx and neither did Sraffa. There are several Marxist Sraffians. Sraffia didn't destroy Marx and more than he destroyed Ricardo.