Meek, Dickinson and Marx's Falling Rate of Profit
Howard C. Petith
Abstract
Howard C. Petith
Abstract
In the 1950s and 60s Meek and Dickinson argued that, in a Marxian model, the rate of profit would first rise and then fall as capital accumulated. In their recent A History of Marxian Economics, Howard and King accord this argument the same status as the Okishio theorem. This paper reassesses the argument. It shows that Dickinson's argument violates a basic tenet of the neo-marxian model but that Meek's example may be consistent with an extended version of the same model.
A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
In the 1950s and 60s Meek and Dickinson argued that, in a Marxian model, the rate of profit would first rise and then fall as capital accumulated. In their recent A History of Marxian Economics, Howard and King accord this argument the same status as the Okishio theorem. This paper reassesses the argument. It shows that Dickinson's argument violates a basic tenet of the neo-marxian model but that Meek's example may be consistent with an extended version of the same model.
Key concepts: Rate of profit, Argument (complex analysis), Neoclassical economics, Economics, Profit rate, Profit (economics), Capital (architecture), Positive economics