>destroyed neoclassical economics
>destroyed marxism
>destroyed austrians
>created his own school of economics
>allowed gramsci to write his attack on cultural hegemony
>was the inspiration behind wittgenstein's attack on his previous philosophy
Is there a more underrated intellectual?
Destroyed neoclassical economics
Eli Rivera
Evan Hughes
>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.
Jayden Hernandez
Sorry, this thread is about intellectual achievements, not things that trigger you (although the first part about sraffa is bullshit anyway).
Hudson Collins
Yea user, worship your communist Jew and manlet Albanian and call anyone who derides it an anti-intellectual.
James Nelson
Childhood is thinking economics is worth studying.
Adulthood is realizing the works of Aquinas are all that matters.
Caleb Davis
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.
Brody Bailey
>Aristotelian theology
No thanks
Landon Rogers
There is no such thing as an apolitical economic work.
Charles Long
>created his own school of economics
>He only compiled Ricardo's works
Hmm
Ayden Hall
>Gramsci
didn't know he was Italian.
Jaxon Jackson
I disagree, but feel free to expand. Or even better, point to the political bias in nuevatribuna.es
Carter Sanchez
He was Albanian, living in Italy.
>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.
Nolan Cruz
According to wiki his dad was an t Arbëreshë and his mom was an Italian.
Asher Butler
>any european economist other than this guy mattering
Josiah Perez
>I'll read it, but nonetheless you're purposefully obtuse and naive.
Don't be stupid, user, 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.
But they were bff.
Landon Flores
Economics =/= physics
Evan Hernandez
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.
Michael Sanchez
>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.
Joshua Wood
>neo-ricardian destroys neo-classical economics
wut
Nathaniel Diaz
Thats the fun thing about economics- it's mostly musings and theory. You can declare yourself a winner without proof.
Ethan Ramirez
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.
Jeremiah Anderson
Cameron Long
>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 user, you already have.
Thomas Butler
why does neo-classical economics exclude Ricardo?
Not being cheeky, I genuinely don't know.
Connor Green
>Is the theory of relativity socialist
Sounds like Jewish science to me, so yes.
Hudson Lewis
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.
Elijah Sanders
That is the question, and that was a succinct answer.
Thank you.
Juan Scott
You're welcome, user.
Jayden Morales
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.