> Neoclassical econ is more interesting as an ideology (as is
> astrology). It obviously has so little to do with the real world,
> the real question is what purposes its preposterous theories serve. If
> it were more relevant to policy than it is, then the chair of the CEA
> would be an important figure in the government instead of a largely
> useless figurehead. And so what if neoclassical economics has no
> explanation of profit. Bourgeois society has a couple - the reward
> for risk-taking and the source of investment funds.
So, is it an example of Slavoj Zizek's claim that the ruling ideas are precisely *not* the ideas of those who rule?
-- Shane
________________________________________________________________ GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO! Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less! Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/.