Access

Open Access

Date Range

1972-1978

Description

This collection includes a letter to Harcourt asking for comments on a paper Shaikh was submitting to the Review of Economics and Statistics (5/31/72), a letter from Harcourt discussing Shaikh’s paper and mentioning his book The Cambridge Controversies (7/20/72), a letter to Harcourt thanking him for his comments on Shaikh’s paper (10/11/72), a letter from asking for a copy of Shaikh’s Transformation paper (5/31/73), letter from Harcourt saying that with some editing Shaikh’s paper would be published in Australian Economic Papers (5/14/74), a letter from Harcourt announcing that Australian Economic Papers had received Shaikh’s article “The So-Called ‘Transformation Problem’ Marx Vindicated” (5/15/74), a letter from Harcourt thanking Shaikh for sending his dissertation (6/19/74), a letter from Harcourt discussing one of Shaikh’s papers and asking him to possibly extrapolate on some points (2/28/75), a letter to Harcourt discussing the possibility of writing a book on the theory of value (7/14/76), a letter from Harcourt discussing Shaikh’s paper on international values and mentioning a paper on Marx and joint production (8/6/76), a letter from Harcourt discussing a review in New Statesman and telling Shaikh that he heard good things about his visit to Cambridge (1/27/78), a letter to Harcourt discussing Harcourt’s review of Steedman’s book (4/27/78), a letter from Harcourt regarding Shaikh’s remarks (5/17/78), a letter to Harcourt explaining that Shaikh’s review comments sounded harsher than they were (6/1/78), a letter from Harcourt saying that a co-author of his agrees with Shaikh’s comments about Steedman’s book (6/15/78), a letter from Harcourt to Ian Steedman and S. Metcalfe discussing Piero’s interpretation, Wilfred Salter, and Joan’s requirement of a long process of investment and scrapping (11/22/78), a letter from Edward J. Nell discussing the Simon-Levy paper, Walters, and Bronfenbrenner’s book Income Distribution Theory and suggesting Shaikh send a copy of his CV (3/1/72), a letter to the editor of The Review of Economics and Statistics submitting a paper for consideration (5/30/72), a letter from the editor of The Review of Economics and Statistics confirming receipt of a manuscript and asking for additional copies of the article to speed review (6/1/72), a letter to the editor of The Review of Economics and Statistics enclosing additional copies of a paper (6/5/72), a letter from Scott Koss requesting a copy of the humbug production function paper and mentioning seeing Joan Robinson who praised Shaikh’s paper (9/13/72), a letter to the editor of The Review of Economics and Statistics inquiring about the status of a paper (10/11/72), a letter to Professor Hendrik S. Houthakker, editor of The Review of Economics and Statistics, enclosing a shortened revised edition of a paper (10/30/72), letter from the editor of Review of Economics and Statistics acknowledging receipt of a manuscript (11/1/72), a letter from Franklin M. Fisher discussing aggregate production functions and capital stocks and labors (11/8/72), a letter from Scott discussing Cobb-Douglass functions, econometrics, and a trip to the US (11/14/72), a letter to the editor of The Review of Economics and Statistics inquiring about the current status of a paper (2/22/73), a letter from Hendrik S. Houthakker stating that The Review of Economics and Statistics accepting Shaikh’s paper “Law of Production and Laws of Algebra” (3/8/73), a letter from Ian Steedman requesting a copy of Shaikh’s paper “Laws of Production and Laws of Algebra” (3/14/73), a letter from B. C. Chakrabarti requesting reprints of Shaikh’s articles (3/16/73), a letter from Leeroy Murray, a final year student at the Middlesex Polytechnic, Enfield, requesting a copy of Shaikh’s article on the “Humbug Production Function” (3/30/73), a letter from Ian Steedman thanking Shaikh for his paper and mentioning Henryk Grossman (4/12/73), a letter from Harcourt thanking Shaikh for his letter and paper and discussing the Humbug paper and suggesting other possible journals in which to publish (6/6/73), a letter from Leeroy Murray thanking Shaikh for forwarding his article and discussing his final year exams and B.A. Social Science degree (10/3/73), letter from Luigi Pasinetti thanking Shaikh for his article and discussing Robert Solow’s comment (6/12/74), a letter from Joan Robinson discussing the publication of Shaikh’s article and saying it was a shame he was not given the opportunity to comment on Solow’s reply, and a possible book collaboration with Schefold (6/21/74), a letter to Hendrik S. Houthakker, editor of The Review of Economics and Statistics, discussing Solow’s comment on Shaikh’s article and requesting the right to reply to it in the next issue (6/28/74), a letter from Houthakker explaining The Review of Economics and Statistics’s policy to terminate a discussion after the first rebuttal and that they saw Shaikh’s article as a critique of Solow (7/1/74), a letter from Harcourt discussing Shaikh’s comments on Solow and saying that he did not believe Shaikh needed to do much work to get his dissertation into publishable shape (8/13/74), a letter from Harcourt discussing Shaikh’s previous version of a paper and saying he might be in NYC following the International Economic Association (IEA) Conference in Spain (2/11/75), a letter from Harcourt discussing Shaikh’s recent paper and mentioning Ed Nell, Rosalind Seneca, and Tom Cooley (2/14/75), and a letter from Harcourt discussing the Australian Economic Papers publishing Shaikh and disparaging Houthakker’s and Solow’s treatment of Shaikh (3/5/75).

Download

Included in

Economics Commons

Share

COinS