Academic literature on the topic 'Ricardo, David, Marx, Karl'
Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles
Consult the lists of relevant articles, books, theses, conference reports, and other scholarly sources on the topic 'Ricardo, David, Marx, Karl.'
Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.
You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.
Journal articles on the topic "Ricardo, David, Marx, Karl"
1
Kurz, Heinz D. "Schumpeter im sozialwissenschaftlichen Pantheon." Leviathan 47, no. 3 (2019): 375–97. http://dx.doi.org/10.5771/0340-0425-2019-3-375.
Full textAbstract:
Der Aufsatz vergleicht die Wirtschafts- und Gesellschaftstheorie Joseph Alois Schumpeters mit den Theorien anderer großer Sozialwissenschaftler, insbesondere denjenigen von Adam Smith, David Ricardo, Karl Marx, Léon Walras und John Maynard Keynes. Das Hauptaugenmerk gilt Gemeinsamkeiten und Unterschieden. Die in der Sekundärliteratur absolut und relativ wachsende Bedeutung des „Propheten der Innovation“ wird unterstrichen.
2
Previatti, Carine Botelho. "A recusa de Marx da teoria do valor - David Harvey." GEOUSP: Espaço e Tempo (Online) 22, no. 1 (2018): 257–64. http://dx.doi.org/10.11606/issn.2179-0892.geousp.2018.145931.
Full textAbstract:
Neste artigo recente, ainda não publicado em livro, David Harvey compara a teoria do valor-trabalho de Ricardo e a teoria do valor adotada por Karl Marx, trazendo uma amostra das discussões de seu mais recente livro, Capital e a loucura da razão econômica. O autor discute as diferenças entre essas teorias e seus desdobramentos nos estudos marxistas atuais, concluindo que a forma valor dos estudos de Marx não pode ser considerada um “princípio imóvel e estável no mundo tumultuado do capital, mas uma métrica instável e em constante mudança”, que se expressa nas “novas práticas de reprodução social e massivas transformações nas vontades, necessidades e desejos de toda uma população” pela inserção na vida cotidiana. Segundo o autor, isso demonstra que essa teoria está “muito além do que Ricardo tinha em mente e é igualmente distante daquela concepção de valor geralmente atribuída a Marx”.
3
Chaikind, Stephen. "The Role of Viticulture and Enology in the Development of Economic Thought: How Wine Contributed to Modern Economic Theory." Journal of Wine Economics 7, no. 2 (2012): 213–25. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/jwe.2012.17.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractThis paper introduces the role wine has played as a central factor in the history of economic thought. The focus is on an examination of documented sources that connect wine and its viticulture and enology with the evolution of economic concepts. Works by Adam Smith, David Ricardo, Karl Marx, John Stuart Mill, Léon Walras, Alfred Marshall, and others are examined, as well as wine economic ideas postulated by Greek and Roman thinkers. (JEL Classification: A1, B1, B3, N00)
4
Sholahuddin, M. "KRITIK TERHADAP SISTEM EKONOMISOSIALIS DAN KAPITALIS." Jurnal Ekonomi Pembangunan: Kajian Masalah Ekonomi dan Pembangunan 2, no. 2 (2007): 193. http://dx.doi.org/10.23917/jep.v2i2.3915.
Full textAbstract:
The failure of economic capitalism system stated by Adam Smith (1723-1790) and David Ricardo (1772-1823) actually have been criticized by Karl Marx (1818-1883) in his book "A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy" (1857) and "A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy" (1859). Karl Marx and Engels compile a new synthesis of economic socialist system. Stranger enough, socialism particularly as economic ideology is destroyed earlier than Capitalism. Meanwhile, capitalism still survives by transforming performance. For examples, at the time of the glory of Socialism age, capitalism was transformed into socialism state with social justice and welfare state concepts, and when Islam began to rise, it was transformed into new performance as if it has characteristic of Islam, but in fact it is still capitalism. This writing tries to criticize both of them by Islamic economic perspective.
5
Rodríguez Herrera, Adolfo. "Adam Smith’s concept of labour: value or measure?" Revista de Ciencias Económicas 34, no. 2 (2016): 152–65. http://dx.doi.org/10.15517/rce.v34i2.27195.
Full textAbstract:
Smith is considered the father of the labour theory of value developed by David Ricardo and Karl Marx and simultaneously of the cost-of-production theory of value developed by John Stuart Mill and Alfred Marshall. This polysemy is partly because Smith is developping the terminology to refer to value and measure of value, and often uses it with much imprecision. That has led to different interpretations about his position on these issues, most of them derived from an error of interpretation of Ricardo and Marx.
 This paper reviews the concepts developed by Smith to formulate his theory of value (value, real price and exchangeable value). Our interpretation of his texts on value does not coincide with what has traditionally been done. According to our interpretation, it would not be correct the criticism made by Ricardo and Marx on Smith’s position about the role of labour as measure of value. For these authors, Smith is not consistent in proposing that the value of a commodity is defined or measured as the amount of labour necessary to produce it and simultaneously as the amount of labour that can be purchased by this commodity. We try to show that for Smith the labour has a double role –as source and measure of value–, and that to it is due the confusion that generates his use of some terms: Smith proposes labour as a measure of value because he conceives it as a source of value. With this interpretation it becomes clear, paradoxically, that Smith holds a labour theory of value that substantially corresponds to the one later developed by Ricardo and Marx.
6
Couto, Joaquim Miguel, Maria de Fátima Garcia, Carlos Eduardo de Freitas, and Rodolfo Cezar Silvestre. "Desemprego tecnológico: Ricardo, Marx e o caso da indústria de transformação Brasileira (1990-2007)." Economia e Sociedade 20, no. 2 (2011): 299–327. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/s0104-06182011000200004.
Full textAbstract:
A questão do desemprego tecnológico preocupou a mente de dois dos maiores pensadores da ciência econômica: David Ricardo e Karl Marx. Ambos acreditaram que a introdução de novas máquinas poderia causar uma situação de desemprego crônico durante certo período de tempo. No entanto, esta era apenas uma possibilidade, que já havia ocorrido no capitalismo industrial inglês, mas que poderia ser evitada caso novos investimentos absorvessem a mão de obra dispensada pela introdução de nova maquinaria. O Brasil, por sua vez, passou, ao longo da década de 1990, por um período de reestruturação de seu parque industrial que, mediante a metodologia utilizada em nosso estudo, resultou na conclusão da existência do fenômeno do desemprego tecnológico durante boa parte da referida década.
7
Couto, Joaquim Miguel, Carlos Eduardo de Freitas, and Ana Cristina Lima Couto. "A visão clássica da ameaça do desemprego tecnológico." A Economia em Revista - AERE 17, no. 1 (2011): 5. http://dx.doi.org/10.4025/aere.v17i1.13066.
Full textAbstract:
A questão do desemprego tecnológico preocupou a mente de dois dos maiores pensadores da ciência econômica: David Ricardo e Karl Marx. Ambos acreditaram que a introdução de novas máquinas poderia causar uma situação de desemprego crônico durante certo período de tempo, prejudicial a classe trabalhadora. O movimento luddita do início do século XIX deixou claro que o desemprego tecnológico era um fenômeno real. No entanto, os autores reconheceram que o desemprego tecnológico poderia ser evitado caso novos investimentos absorvessem a mão-de-obra dispensada pela introdução de nova maquinaria. Ou seja, tudo dependeria da velocidade do desenvolvimento da tecnologia e do crescimento da economia, aliada ainda ao crescimento da população e da redução da jornada de trabalho.
8
Da Silva, Edmilson Gomes. "O CONCEITO DE TRABALHO ALIENADO EM KARL MARX NA SOCIEDADE CAPITALISTA: DISCUSSÕES FILOSÓFICAS NA MODERNIDADE NOS MANUSCRITOS ECONÔMICOS - FILOSÓFICOS." Cadernos Cajuína 3, no. 1 (2018): 35. http://dx.doi.org/10.52641/cadcaj.v3i1.197.
Full textAbstract:
<p>O objetivo desta pesquisa é analisar o conceito de trabalho alienado no pensamento de Karl Marx na sociedade moderna capitalista aos conhecimentos filosóficos nos manuscritos econômicos – filosóficos,1844. Desse modo, o trabalho alienado é fundamental para um debate e discussões filosóficas na teoria marxista e o liberalismo econômico na modernidade. Na discussão teórica - filosófica, Marx discute o conceito de trabalho alienado a partir de uma crítica aos fundamentos econômicos e políticos na sociedade do mercado/capitalista. Contudo, a literatura teórica é apresentada nos manuscritos econômicos – filosóficos. Nesta obra, Marx faz crítica aos filósofos fisiocratas de Adam Smith e David Ricardo. Estes consideram o trabalho como de fonte de riqueza do trabalhador. Assim, trabalho e alienação vão na lógica sob o processo da mais valia dos sujeitos como a exploração da força do trabalhador para manter a relação econômica para o sistema de produção capitalista. Dessa forma, A metodologia utilizada foi uma pesquisa bibliográfica no pensamento marxista sobre e o conceito de trabalho alienado na sociedade capitalista.</p><p> </p>
9
Howard, M. C., and J. E. King. "Marx, Jones, Rodbertus and the Theory of Absolute Rent." Journal of the History of Economic Thought 14, no. 1 (1992): 70–83. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1053837200004405.
Full textAbstract:
As is well-known, Karl Marx distinguished three types of rent. In addition to two categories of differential rent, closely related to the Ricardian extensive and intensive margins, he argued (against David Ricardo) that rent was paid on the least fertile land. For Marx this so-called “absolute rent” resulted from the barrier posed by landed property to the free movement of capital into agricultural production. Since the organic composition of capital was relatively low in agriculture, the prices of production of farm products were lower than their labor values. The existence of private property in land prevented the reduction of agricultural prices to these prices of production, and allowed the payment of rent even on what could be described, in Ricardian terms, as marginal land. There exists a sizeable literature on Marx's theory of absolute rent,1 but there is no systematic account of its gestation and development. In this paper we explain how Marx's critique of Ricardian rent theory evolved between his first doubts early in 1851 and the articulation of a distinctive alternative analysis in the manuscripts of 1862–63. We also assess the influence exerted on Marx by Richard Jones and Johann Karl Rodbertus, and briefly discuss the significance of Marx's theory of absolute rent for his political economy as a whole.
10
Kurz, Heinz D. "Technical progress, capital accumulation and income distribution in Classical economics: Adam Smith, David Ricardo and Karl Marx." European Journal of the History of Economic Thought 17, no. 5 (2010): 1183–222. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09672567.2010.522242.
Full textDissertations / Theses on the topic "Ricardo, David, Marx, Karl"
1
Lainé, Mathieu-Joffre. "David Ricardo, Karl Marx et l'antagonisme nécessaire des intérêts de classe." Doctoral thesis, Université Laval, 2017. http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11794/27601.
Full textAbstract:
La théorie de la valeur-travail élaborée par l'économiste anglais David Ricardo (1772-1823) a rapidement été mise à profit par les théoriciens socialistes afin de démontrer l'iniquité du salariat et pour donner une base à un système socialiste de production et d'échange ; Karl Marx (1818-1883) l'a subséquemment développée à titre d'explication de l'ensemble du processus de la production capitaliste, il en a fait le principe de la lutte des classes. Rédigée dans une perspective contextualiste, cette thèse vise donc à démontrer minutieusement, par la théorie et par l'histoire à la fois, que Marx emploie intentionnellement la théorie économique ricardienne dans le Capital afin de convaincre son premier public, principalement composé des membres de l'école historique d'économie politique allemande (« Historische Schule der Nationalökonomie »), de l'antagonisme nécessaire des intérêts de classes. Mais cette thèse vise également à démontrer l'insuffisance fondamentale de l'interprétation hégélienne du Capital. Cette interprétation présente non seulement des difficultés exégétiques rédhibitoires, mais elle nuit malheureusement à la bonne compréhension des textes de Marx et de Hegel. Marx pense la lutte des classes en termes ricardiens et non pas en termes hégéliens. Et contrairement à ce l'on a d'abord proclamé au début du XXe siècle, la compréhension du Capital n'exige pas la compréhension de la philosophie de Hegel. En renouant dans cette thèse avec l'interprétation ricardienne du Capital, nous renouons avec la seule interprétation que Marx a lui-même publiquement et officiellement entérinée de son ouvrage — un fait historique avéré que la majorité des interprètes du Capital persiste encore aujourd'hui à ignorer. En soi, l'interprétation ricardienne du Capital n'est donc ni originale ni nouvelle. Elle ne possède pas non plus de panache philosophique. En revanche, elle a été corroborée par Marx, ce qui constitue un moyen sûr de réfuter ou d'écarter définitivement certaines interprétations que l'on a parfois données du Capital au cours du XXe siècle, a fortiori son interprétation hégélienne, et de contribuer par là à l'avancement des études marxiennes. En plus de rappeler, de revaloriser et de revendiquer l'héritage ricardien de Marx à l'aide d'un luxe inédit de précisions théoriques et historiques, cette thèse propose enfin de réinsérer la pensée économique et politique de Hegel dans la tradition caméraliste allemande (« Kameralwissenschaften »), une tradition intellectuelle à laquelle les interprètes hégéliens du Capital ont arraché Hegel afin de téléologiquement faire de lui le précurseur de Marx.
2
Choe, Hong-Gyo. "Essai sur les théories de la crise des classiques et de Marx." Paris 10, 1995. http://www.theses.fr/1995PA100010.
Full textAbstract:
Dans ce travail, nous avons examiné la théorie classique. La critique de Marx sur la théorie classique et discute l'itinéraire théorique au cours de sa critique de la théorie classique. Puis nous avons discuté la théorie de la crise dans le capital. Chez les classiques se présentent déjà des concepts et des idées importants, malgré leur forme rudimentaire et des confusions. Dans ce travail, nous avons examiné l'aspect de continuité et de dépassement entre les idées classiques et celles de Marx, à savoir l'influence des classiques sur la formation de la pensée de Marx. Deuxièmement, nous avons discuté l'évolution des idées de Marx qui se trouve explicitement ou implicitement dans sa critique dans les Grundrisse, les théories de la plus-value. Puis en discutant les théories des crises dans le capital, nous avons abordé de façon critique les problèmes lies à la théorie de la crise<br>In this thesis, we examined classical theories, Marx’s critic on them, while discussing the theoretical itinerary which can be found in his critic. We also discussed the crisis theories in capital. In classical theories, one can find the important concepts and ideas on crisis, even if they are present in rudimentary and confused form. We examined what Marx had succeeded to and what he surpassed classical economists, that is, the influence of the latter economists on Marx. Second, we discussed the evolution of Marx’s thought on crisis which is found, explicitly or implicitly, in his critic presented in Grundrisse, theories of the surplus value. In discussing the theories on crisis in capital, we discussed the problem posited in the crisis theory of Marx
3
Malarre, Jean-Claude. "La circulation monétaire : étude critique de l'analyse de Marx." Paris 10, 1987. http://www.theses.fr/1987PA100045.
Full textAbstract:
La définition de la circulation marchande simple comme procès social d'échanges implique l'exclusion d'au moins un agent de la figure générale de transactions m-a-m. Cependant, Marx caractérise la circulation monétaire comme déterminée par la circulation des marchandises et non déterminante de celle-ci. Le statut du producteur d'or et la nature de ses transactions ne sont pas clairement spécifies. Si l'on interprète ces dernières comme des échanges soumis à la loi de la valeur travail, on doit alors reconnaitre que Marx n'est pas en opposition vis-à-vis des analyses monétaires ricardiennes: l'or est injecte dans la circulation par un troc; la circulation monétaire ne peut déborder; le jeu de thesaurisation-déthesaurisation constitue un mécanisme d'ajustement de la monnaie circulante vis-à-vis de sa quantité naturelle qui trouve sa correspondance, chez Ricardo, dans l'arbitrage or marchandise or monnaie et la présence de stocks dans la branche or; le sens de causalité monnaie prix traduit la passivité des grandeurs monétaires vis-à-vis d'une grandeur réelle: la "somme des prix à réaliser". Ces propositions sont incompatibles avec la théorie de la dépense monétaire ébauchée néanmoins par Marx (fonction de validation sociale attribuée a l'acheteur; présence de la monnaie dans l'échange comme condition permissive des crises). La représentation du procès social de transactions capitalistes est contrariée par la difficulté que souligne Rosa Luxemburg: l'impossibilité de rendre compte du reflux monétaire caractérisant le fonctionnement de l'argent comme capital quand l'excèdent capitaliste est défini comme surproduit. La réponse de Boukharine n'est pas acceptable. Une reformulation pourrait s'appuyer sur la notion de monnayage et le modèle de la plus-value relative (ou l'excédent résulte d'un fractionnement de la valeur globale)<br>The definition of single commodity circulation as a social exchange process implies the exclusion of at least one agent in the general pattern of c-m-c transactions. However, Marx characterizes the circulation of money as being determined by the circulation of commodities and not its determinant. The gold producer's status and the nature of his transactions are not clearly specified. If one interprets the latter as exchanges subjected by the law of work value, it must then be admitted that Marx’s opposition to ricardian monetary analysis is only apparent: gold is injected in the circulation by way of a barter; circulation of money cannot overflow; the hoarding and dishoarding system constitutes an adjustment mechanism of the money circulating with relation to its natural quantity which, according to Ricardo, corresponds to arbitration gold goods gold money and the presence of stocks in the gold branch; the sense of causality money - price translate the passivity of monetary bulk with respect to a real bulk; "the sum of prices to be realized" these propositions are incompatible with Marx’s sketched out theory of monetary spending (function of social validation attributed to the buyer ; presence of money in the exchange as a permissive condition to crises). The representation of the social process of capitalist transactions is thwarted by a difficulty pointed out by Rosa Luxemburg; the impossibility of accounting for the monetary reflux characterizing the functioning of money as capital when the excess in defined as a surplus product: Bukharin’s answer is unacceptable. A reformulation could rest both on the notion of seignorage and the model of relative surplus value (where the excess result from a fractioning of the global value)
4
Gaul, Michael. "Progrès et prix naturels : conceptions de l'Histoire dans la pensée économique de Cantillon à Marx." Thesis, Paris 1, 2020. http://www.theses.fr/2020PA01E025.
Full textAbstract:
Cette thèse analyse les liens entre la naissance de la notion d’un progrès historique dans la deuxième moitié du dix-huitième siècle et la formation de l’économie politique en tant que science autonome. Contrairement à une idée reçue, l’économie classique post-smithienne et la théorie ricardienne en particulier n’apparaissent pas comme une «science lugubre», mais plutôt comme une théorie pure du progrès. Dans la première partie, nous dégageons les articulations entre conception de l’histoire et théorie économique à l’œuvre chez Richard Cantillon, François Quesnay et Adam Smith. Alors que la théorie de Cantillon exprime une conception cyclique de l’histoire tandis que la théorie physiocratique vise à la suppression de cette conception cyclique de l’histoire, la théorie smithienne se démarque de celles de Cantillon et Quesnay, en fondant une conception progressiste de l’histoire et en affirmant que le progrès est «naturel». Comme la conception progressiste de Smith repose sur une coordination, simple mais novatrice, du changement technique dans le temps et dans l’espace, la deuxième et la troisième partie étudie la théorie classique du progrès technique et du commerce international. C’est ici que Ricardo s’avère être l’économiste smithien le plus rigoureux, en ayant identifié la condition sous laquelle le progrès est, effectivement, «naturel», et en ayant insisté sur le fait que cette condition est approximativement satisfaite par les prix naturels. En conclusion, l’affirmation d’un progrès naturel est à la fois ce qui unit les économistes classiques (post-)smithiens, y compris Marx, et ce qui les distingue des représentants antérieurs de la même approche du « surplus »<br>This thesis analyzes the relations between the origin of the notion of historical progress in the second half of the eighteenth century and the formation of political economy as an autonomous science. In contrast to a traditional view, post-Smithian classical political economy and Ricardian economics in particular appear not as the ‘dismal science’, but rather as a pure theory of progress. The first part deals with the way in which conceptions of history and economic theory are articulated in the works of Richard Cantillon, François Quesnay et Adam Smith. Whereas Cantillon’s theory expresses a cyclical conception of history and physiocratic thought aims at the repression of this cyclical conception, Smith’s theory is opposed both to Cantillon and Quesnay, through its foundation of a progressive conception of history and the affirmation that progress is ‘natural’. Since Smith’s progressive conception of the historical process is based upon a simple, yet novel co-ordination of technical change in time and across space, the second and third parts study the classical theory of technical progress and the classical theory of international trade. It is in this context that Ricardo turns out to be the most radical of the ‘Smithian’ economists: Ricardo identified the condition under which progress is indeed ‘natural’ and insisted upon the fact that this condition is approximately satisfied by natural prices. In the final analysis, it is Smith’s affirmation of natural progress which provides the common framework for post-Smithian classical economists, Marx included, and distinguishes them from earlier exponents of the same ‘surplus approach’ to value and distribution
5
Maurin, Max. "Les fondements non neoclassiques du protectionnisme." Thesis, Bordeaux 4, 2013. http://www.theses.fr/2013BOR40014/document.
Full textAbstract:
Cette thèse a pour objectif de montrer que Marx et Keynes, par des analyses distinctes, aboutissentà une même conclusion qui conserve un sens aujourd’hui : la cause ultime de la crise résidedans l’excès de concurrence. De là suit que le protectionnisme, conçu comme une régulation des effetsde la concurrence sur l’économie nationale, est, en fin de compte, une protection contre la crise.La première partie de ce travail traite de la période allant de Ricardo à Marx. Dans un premierchapitre, est exposé le modèle de Ricardo et les critiques qui l’ont accompagné. Au nombre de sesdétracteurs figure Marx dont notre deuxième chapitre montre que la théorie peut être lue commeappelant au protectionnisme dès lors que son analyse est replacée dans un objectif de survie ducapitalisme. La seconde partie justifie l’existence et démontre le bien-fondé d’un protectionnismekeynésien. Le troisième chapitre établit la découverte, par Keynes, de la nécessité de proposer unprotectionnisme de sauvegarde et montre que cette conclusion a été largement perdue de vue dansles interprétations de sa pensée. Enfin, le quatrième chapitre, par une lecture circuitiste de Keynes,met en garde contre les effets pervers du libre-échange sur les deux composantes essentielles de lademande que sont la consommation et surtout l’investissement<br>This thesis aims to show that, despite separate analyses, Marx and Keynes support a similarconclusion which preserves a meaning today : the ultimate cause of the crisis is excessive competition.It follows that protectionism as a regulation of the effects of competition on national economyis ultimately a protection against the crisis. The first part of this work covers the period fromRicardo to Marx. The first chapter outlines the Ricardo model and the criticisms who accompaniedit. Marx was part of these detractors. From a survival of capitalism perspective, the secondchapter shows that his theory can be interpreted as a call for protectionism. The second part justifiesthe existence and demonstrates the validity of Keynesian protectionism. The third chapterestablishes the Keynes’ discovery of the necessity to use protection as a guarantee against crises.This conclusion has been widely lost sight of by those who interpreted his thought. Finally chapterfour warns against the negative effects of free trade on two essential components of demand namelyconsumption and, foremost, investment. We do so using a circuitist approach
6
Sirafi, Ziad. "Investigating media’s change of attitude towards lobbyism in Sweden : A quantitative content analysis study between the years 1970-2014 and based on theories from the disciplines of politicalscience and sociology." Thesis, Linnéuniversitetet, Institutionen för statsvetenskap (ST), 2018. http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:lnu:diva-71401.
Full textAbstract:
The purpose of this study is to examine why the media has a more negative attitude towards lobbyism in 2014 compared to earlier years since the 1970s in Sweden. This study examines first if a change of attitude has occurred between the given years and whether the attitude is more positive, negative or neutral towards lobbyism in recent years compared to earlier years and lastly if the media are comparing different contexts in which lobbying takes place. The method of this study is based on quantitative content analysis, and on Kanol’s ideas that by implementing theories from different disciplines one can develop theories on comparative lobbying in order to increase and improve our knowledge on the phenomenon of lobbyism as the contemporary research on the subject are scars and underdeveloped. The material in this study are news articles that have been collected between 1970 to 2000 and every second year from 2000 up until 2014. This study also provides a comprehensive picture of the Swedish context in which lobbying takes place by gathering information from multiple sources and earlier studies as this information has as of yet not been gathered in a single study up until now. The conclusion is that there has been a change of attitude towards lobbyism in Sweden, however, the dominant attitude is not a negative but rather a more skeptical/cynical one which has increased since 1992. The term lobbying is controversial because it’s being mentioned in various topics that could be considered negative by the reader as the decision making whether the news article is negative or positive is subjective. Because the media has increased its negative news reporting overall and that the unconscious mind of the reader is also attracted to negative news reporting, the term lobbying can be considered “negative” overall as it is constantly being mentioned in negative contexts even when the article is not about lobbying. A reasonable explanation why the media has a more negative / skeptical attitude to lobbyism is because of previous scandals related to lobbying either in Sweden or outside the country's border, but also because the media can’t hold the elected officials responsible for their actions as transparency and accountability is absent. Because of the increased reporting in Sweden on lobbying from all over the world, the subject will most likely become more relevant on the Swedish political agenda.
Books on the topic "Ricardo, David, Marx, Karl"
1
Yvette, Katan, ed. Les économistes classiques: D'Adam Smith à Ricardo, de Stuart Mill à Karl Marx. Hatier, 1988.
Find full text
2
Mirowski, Philip. Why There Is (as Yet) No Such Thing as an Economics of Knowledge. Edited by Don Ross and Harold Kincaid. Oxford University Press, 2009. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195189254.003.0005.
Full textAbstract:
Once upon a time, say around the era of David Ricardo and Karl Marx, political economy was primarily concerned with the production of national wealth. This “classical” notion tended to hang on long into the twentieth century, well after the invention of neoclassical economics in the 1870s. Nevertheless, there was no denying that within neoclassical economics, exchange had displaced production as the primary topic of interest. But subsequently, something rather extraordinary happened around the middle of the twentieth century, gaining momentum as the century waned. More and more, economics at the cutting edge became relatively cavalier about treating trade as static allocation. This article endeavors to point out that all major existing modern traditions of the Economics of Knowledge have encountered their comeuppance solely from within, leading various economists to concede that their own constructions of the epistemology of the agent were structurally incoherent.
3
Fine, Ben. Value Dimension: Marx Versus Ricardo and Sraffa. Taylor & Francis Group, 2013.
Find full text
4
Fine, Ben. Value Dimension: Marx Versus Ricardo and Sraffa. Taylor & Francis Group, 2014.
Find full text
5
Dhongde, Shatakshee. Measuring Global Poverty. Oxford University Press, 2017. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190846626.013.259.
Full textAbstract:
Economists have long been preoccupied with trying to understand the nature and causes of poverty. From Adam Smith to David Ricardo, Thomas Malthus, Karl Marx, and John Stuart Mill, a common belief among economists is that the benefits of economic growth are rarely experienced by the poorer sections of society. An important issue is how to measure global poverty accurately. International organizations such as the United Nations and the World Bank have endeavored to measure global poverty since the adoption of the Millennium Development Goals (MDG), stated in the UN’s Millennium Declaration which was adopted in 2000 by 189 nations. However, measuring global poverty is far from simple. Estimates of poverty and particularly of global poverty are very sensitive to the underlying assumptions, such as the notion of poverty itself, the choice of welfare indicator, the unit of measurement used, and purchasing power parity rates. One of the significant advances in global poverty studies was the World Bank’s introduction of a poverty line in the 1990 World Development Report (WDR). Despite these efforts, the precise number of poor in the world remains ambiguous. Nevertheless, emerging frontiers in poverty analysis indicate new interest in measuring poverty more broadly. Some ideas that may dominate the future of poverty research include multidimensional poverty, vulnerability to poverty, and chronic poverty.
6
Ben, Fine, ed. The Value dimension: Marx versus Ricardo and Sraffa. Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1986.
Find full text
7
Archer, Candace. Financial Crises. Oxford University Press, 2017. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190846626.013.180.
Full textAbstract:
Numerous crises have occurred since the beginnings of the modern economic system, from the Dutch Tulip Mania of 1636 and the South Sea Bubble of 1720 to the Dollar Crisis and Asian Financial Crisis. Scholars have written about the causes and remedies of financial crisis, resulting in a substantial amount of literature on the subject especially after the Great Depression. The writing on financial crisis declined between the end of World War II and the monetary crises in the early 1970s, but has become vibrant again since the 1980s. Some of the earliest voices that contributed to the intellectual history of studying financial crisis include Adam Smith, Karl Marx, David Ricardo, Walter Bagehot, and John Maynard Keynes. These men provided the foundation for understanding the central issues and questions about financial crisis and influenced the debates and scholarship that followed. One such debate involved monetarists vs. business cycle theorists. The monetarists argue that crises are caused by changes in the money supply, while those favoring a business cycle approach insist that expansions and contractions are part of economic interactions and so the economy will at times experience crises. As crises continue to affect both domestic and global financial markets, more perspectives are added to the discussion, including those that invoke rational expectations and economic models, along with those that draw from international political economy. There are also questions that remain unanswered, such as the issue of crisis response and that of financial fragility.
8
Fine, Ben. The Value Dimension: Marx Versus Ricardo and Sraffa (Economy and Society Series). Routledge & Kegan Paul Books Ltd, 1986.
Find full text
9
Sayers, Sean. Marxism, Religion and Ideology: Themes from David Mclellan. Taylor & Francis Group, 2017.
Find full text
10
Widerquist, Karl, and Grant S. McCall. The Hobbesian Hypothesis in Nineteenth-Century Political Theory. Edinburgh University Press, 2017. http://dx.doi.org/10.3366/edinburgh/9780748678662.003.0006.
Full textAbstract:
This chapter shows how “the Hobbesian hypothesis” (the claim that everyone is better off in a state society with a private property system than they could reasonably expect to be in any society without either of those institutions) appeared in Nineteen-Century Political Theory. As in the Eighteen Century, disagreement about the truth of the hypothesis produced virtually no debate. G. W. F. Hegel, Frédéric Bastiat, and others asserted it with very little supporting evidence. Henry David Thoreau, Herbert Spencer, Henry George, Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels, John Robert Seeley, Henry Sidgwick, Henry Sumner Maine, and Peter Kropotkin all voiced various levels of scepticism, and some, especially Kropotkin, produced considerable evidence. Yet supporters went on asserting the hypothesis as if it were an unchallengeable and obvious truth.
Book chapters on the topic "Ricardo, David, Marx, Karl"
1
Walter, Ryan. "Introduction." In Before Method and Models. Oxford University Press, 2021. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780197603055.003.0001.
Full textAbstract:
This chapter describes how the book departs from the existing historiography that concerns the work of Thomas Robert Malthus and David Ricardo. In short, the approach here is to focus on intellectual contexts and linguistic evidence. This excludes the usual treatment of these authors in terms of their methods and models, and it also forecloses the study of their work in relation to ‘classical political economy’ since this category is a retrospective invention of Karl Marx that he coined for the purpose of establishing his supersession of these writers. The implications of the general revision attempted here are far-reaching, especially in relation to the propriety of approaching past thinkers in terms of their ‘method’ and the nature of political economy as a vocation in the early nineteenth century.
2
Galbraith, John Kenneth. "A Look at the Landscape." In Economics in Perspective. Princeton University Press, 2017. http://dx.doi.org/10.23943/princeton/9780691171647.003.0001.
Full textAbstract:
This chapter discusses the history of economics and the events that shaped that history. It first considers the nature and content of economics, taking into account questions related to the theory of value and the theory of distribution, the institutions involved in economic activity, and the larger political and social framework in which economic life proceeds. It views economics as a reflection of the world in which specific economic ideas have developed, such as those associated with Adam Smith, David Ricardo, Karl Marx, and John Maynard Keynes. It argues that economic ideas are not very important when and where there is no economy. Change in economics has been reluctant and reluctantly accepted, especially by those who benefit from the status quo and economists who have a vested interest in what has always been taught and believed.
3
Bellofiore, Riccardo. "4. David Ricardo oltre l’interpretazione sraffiana." In Smith Ricardo Marx Sraffa. Rosenberg & Sellier, 2020. http://dx.doi.org/10.4000/books.res.5687.
Full text
4
Bellofiore, Riccardo. "6. Karl Marx e il «rapporto di capitale»." In Smith Ricardo Marx Sraffa. Rosenberg & Sellier, 2020. http://dx.doi.org/10.4000/books.res.5697.
Full text
5
Milios, John, Dimitri Dimoulis, and George Economakis. "Marx versus Ricardo (Marx’s Theory of Value)." In Karl Marx and the Classics. Routledge, 2018. http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9781315191652-3.
Full text
6
Milios, John, Dimitri Dimoulis, and George Economakis. "Theory of Value and Ground Rent (Smith-Ricardo-Marx: Converges and Disputes)." In Karl Marx and the Classics. Routledge, 2018. http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9781315191652-9.
Full text
7
"Elftes Kapitel. Theorien über fixes und cirkulierendes Kapital. Ricardo." In Karl Marx / Friedrich Engels Gesamtausgabe (MEGA) BAND 13 Karl Marx Das Kapital Kritik der politischen Ökonomie Zweiter Band Hamburg 1885, edited by Izumi Omura. De Gruyter Akademie Forschung, 2008. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/9783050063614-013.
Full text
8
"Heft 1. Exzerpte aus Werken von David Urquhart, Georg Friedrich von Martens, George Henry Francis und anderen Autoren sowie aus Hansard's parliamentary debates und Correspondence relative to the affairs of the Levant." In Karl Marx / Friedrich Engels: Exzerpte und Notizen, September 1853 bis Januar 1855. Akademie Verlag, 2020. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/9783050078038-001.
Full text
9
"Heft 1. Exzerpte aus Werken von David Urquhart, Georg Friedrich von Martens, George Henry Francis und anderen Autoren sowie aus Hansard's parliamentary debates und Correspondence relative to the affairs of the Levant." In Karl Marx / Friedrich Engels: Exzerpte und Notizen, September 1853 bis Januar 1855. Akademie Verlag, 2020. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/9783050078038-023.
Full text
10
"Heft 4. Exzerpte aus Werken von David Urquhart, William Cargill, Cesar Famin, Jules de Breval und William Barnes sowie aus Reasons for demanding investigation into the charges against Lord Palmerston und aus The Portfolio." In Karl Marx / Friedrich Engels: Exzerpte und Notizen, September 1853 bis Januar 1855. Akademie Verlag, 2020. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/9783050078038-004.
Full textConference papers on the topic "Ricardo, David, Marx, Karl"
1
Montoya, Deysy, Maria das Dores Loreto, and Amélia Bifano. "O trabalho na vida cotidina com foco nas vendas por catálogo: uma análise de experiência." In Simpósio Internacional Trabalho, Relações de Trabalho, Educação e Identidade. Appos, 2020. http://dx.doi.org/10.47930/1980-685x.2020.2804.
Full textAbstract:
O presente artigo é resultado da experiência vivenciada em um curso de mestrado “Trabalho, Tecnologia e Vida Cotidiana”, oferecido pelo Programa de Pós-Graduação em Economia Doméstica da UFV, no qual se desenvolve uma reflexão acadêmica em torno ao trabalho na vida cotidiana, focando naquele desempenhado por mulheres que vendem por catálogo. Para entender o tema das vendas por catálogo, como um tipo de trabalho desta geração, foi feito uma breve revisão pelos momentos mais relevantes do desenvolvimento do trabalho, até chegar na época atual, retomando postulados de diferentes autores, como Karl Marx, e Ricardo Antunes. Entre as conclusões da experiência, ressalta-se a compreensão de como em o cotidiano ficam camuflados distintos tipos de trabalhos, como invisíveis, muito por suas caraterísticas. Evidenciou-se, também, que todos os trabalhos, mesmo aqueles que não tenham uma vinculação direta com uma empresa ou um contrato de trabalho, estão sujeitos a normas e regras, muitas vezes não visibilizadas, que podem levar ao trabalhador a ter sofrimento. Finalmente este artigo, é mais o início de uma pesquisa mais aprofundada sobre a compreensão do mundo do trabalho, reconhecendo-se a sua importância e reflexos na qualidade de vida do trabalhador e sua família, mesmo aqueles que ficam isolados, pouco valorizados e invisíveis, por suas condições e caraterísticas de realização.