#marginal shepherd

[sraffasnotes-blog]

pre-1928, D1/4: 75; B.III.2.liv

Marginal shepherd

Marshall, 518, n. 2

“The influence of an additional man employed in any considerable business on its general economies might also be considered...; but it is too small to be taken seriously”. But that is just what Edgeworth does!

[sraffasnotes-blog]

pre-1928, D1/4: 32; B.III.2.ix

Marginal Shepherd

Marshall's conception of marginal product is wrong: but very few of his applications are – he has been saved by his instinct. But if those fundamental mistakes have no serious consequences for M. himself, they have very serious ones for those (Clarks, etc) who proceed logically to deduce from them as premisses. It is only for this reason that it is important to correct them.

[sraffasnotes-blog]

pre-1928, D1/4: 31; B.III.2.x

Marginal Shepherd

The marginal curve solves the problem: given the price of variable factor, find price of constant factor.

The average curve solves the problem: given the price of constant factor find the price of variable factor.

All prices being in terms of product: i.e. [money] price of product being known & constant.

[sraffasnotes-blog]

pre-1928, D1/4: 10; B.III.2 (xi) 

Marg. Shepherd

The function (profit) of the factors which has to be maximised is defined by Edgeworth, in Palgrave s. v. Functions

(He obviously must consider both size and proportions simultaneously)

[sraffasnotes-blog]

pre-1928, D1/4: 9; B.III.2 (x)

Marg. Shepherd

Marshall, p. 170: “The greatest (marginal) product” Why greatest and not maximum?

“The maximum value of a function is not necessarily the greatest possible value, but only the greatest of all values in the neighbourhood ‒ a peak, but not the summit [etc]”, Edgeworth, in Palgrave s. v. Maximum satisfaction

[Is it then the maximum maximorum?]

[sraffasnotes-blog]

pre-1928, D1/4: 8; B.III.2 (viii)

Marg Shepherd

Marshall, Prin. Ⅱ edit., p. 555

“There may however remain a narrow margin in which they could be indifferently applied (as Jevons would have said): and on that margin the net efficiency of either will be proportionate to the net cost of applying it ... And in the same way with regard to the human agents of production ... There will be a margin on which either will be indifferently applied, and on that margin the efficiency of each will be in proportion to their its cost; or, in other words, the wages of skilled and unskilled labour will bear to one another the same ratio that their efficiencies do at the margin of indifference. Again ...”

[sraffasnotes-blog]

pre-1928, D1/4: 6; B.III.2 (vi)

Marg. Shepherd/continuity

Ⅰ “The notion of the marginal employment of any agent of production implies a possible tendency to diminishing return from its increased employment” (Marshall, 407: efr. 805)

Ⅱ “Diminishing Returns... always rules provided we take sufficiently large doses.” (Edgeworth, Ⅰ, 80: + Marshall, 805)

Ⅲ How can these two statements can be reconciled with Marshall's assumption of continuity (i.e. small doses continually diminishing) in connection with the marg. shepherd (409)?