Online from: 1989
Subject Area: Economics
Options: To add Favourites and Table of Contents Alerts please take a Emerald profile
|Title:||What recantation? The wages fund doctrines of J.S. Mill in light of Smith, and Ricardo|
|Author(s):||Russell McKenzie, (Southeastern Louisiana University, Hammond, Louisiana, USA), John Levendis, (Loyola University New Orleans, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA)|
|Citation:||Russell McKenzie, John Levendis, (2008) "What recantation? The wages fund doctrines of J.S. Mill in light of Smith, and Ricardo", Humanomics, Vol. 24 Iss: 4, pp.293 - 305|
|Keywords:||Capital, Division of labour, Economic doctrines, Economic theory, Pay|
|DOI:||10.1108/08288660810917178 (Permanent URL)|
|Publisher:||Emerald Group Publishing Limited|
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to investigate the various forms of the classical wages fund, and especially the claim that J.S. Mill reversed his position on the nature of the wages fund.
Design/methodology/approach – Textual research from original publications of Adam Smith, David Ricardo and J.S. Mill, as well as references to current interpretations of their work are used in this paper.
Findings – Although J.S. Mill was a supporter of the classical wages fund model, he did not consistently embrace its assumption of a fixed fund. His comment in his
Research limitations/implications – It is hoped this paper can close the book on the debate on Mill's supposed recantation. There was no recantation because Mill held no firm position to recant.
Originality/value – It is understood that no one has made the connection between Mill's recantation and his other inconsistencies regarding aspects of the wages fund.
Existing customers: login
to access this document
To purchase this item please login or register.
Complete and print this form to request this document from your librarian