Note on ‘Duncan Foley On Socialist Alternatives to Capitalism’

Blog-Reference and Blog-Reference

Marx never came to grips with profit and After-Marxians did not spot and rectify his blunders in the last 130+ years. See

• Profit: after 200+ years still elusive
• Karl Marx, fake scientist
• Ricardo and the invention of class war
• Capitalism, poverty, exploitation, and cross-over exploitation
• DSGE and profit―forget it! MMT and profit―forget it!
• Keynes, Lerner, MMT, Trump and exploding profit

Economics is a lost field. Because the foundational concept of profit is false the whole analytical superstructure is false: Walrasianism, DSGE, Keynesianism, Post Keynesianism, MMT, Marxianism, Austrianism are mutually contradictory, axiomatically false, and materially/formally inconsistent. Duncan Foley, as well as Barkley Rosser, ultimately leaves us hanging on what is the most promising alternative to failed economics.

Egmont Kakarot-Handtke

***

REPLY to Barkley Rosser on May 3

You say: “One can argue with Marx’s theory of profit, but it is a deep and serious theory.”

The fact is that the philosopher/agenda pusher/fake scientist Marx had no idea what profit is.#1 And because the foundational concept is false the whole analytical superstructure is false.

Marx’s Capital is NOT a piece of materially/formally consistent science but sociological/ philosophical/political BS or what Feynman called cargo cult science.

This is obvious to anybody with a modicum of scientific competence which a priori excludes you. The deep and serious question is why economists tirelessly recycle long-dead proto-scientific stuff.


#1 Profit for Marxists

Immediately following Profit and the Private-Property-Irrelevance Theorem.