If only there were a branch of economic thought which predicted regular, increasingly intense crises of capital, say, one which was articulated by a bearded 19th century German...
Carl Menger and Joseph Schumpeter! Two of them, and they didn’t utterly fuck up the foundations of their economic analysis by having a shitty labour theory of value.
I fail to see how Marxs LTV is shitty, infact I would say that long term predictions show approaches like Marxs' works a lot better than any praexological or more traditionally neo classical methods.
Steve Keen's Debunking Economics has a good section on the problems with Marx's labor theory of value. IIRC, Marx's original sketch included a good model of the effects of capital, but he later neglected that to focus on labor alone and later Marxists kept that tradition.
Trying to figure how why asking for evidence for something is considered worthy of a downvote by the people on this orange site. Is it because it was too 'to the point' and not verbose enough?
