and, therefore, T* equals the value of the subsistence commodity-bundle, AB, that is the labor-time socially necessary for producing B by the techniques (a, a.) actually prevailing in the economy. It is important to emphasize that there is no element of competitive arbitrage in (4). It is no more than the equation for calculation of the quantities of labor socially necessary for producing goods.

Journal Article On the Three Hicksian Laws of Comparative Statics Get access Michio Morishima Michio Morishima Osaka Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar The Review of Economic Studies, Volume 27, Issue 3, June 1960, Pages 195–201, https://doi.org/10.2307/2296081 Published: 01 June 1960

Journal Article Dr. Klein's Interpretation of Leontief's System—A Rejoinder Get access Michio Morishima Michio Morishima Oxford Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar The Review of Economic Studies, Volume 25, Issue 1, October 1957, Pages 59–61, https://doi.org/10.2307/2296124 Published: 01 October 1957

Journal Article Notes on the Theory of Stability of Multiple Exchange Get access Michio Morishima Michio Morishima Oxford Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar The Review of Economic Studies, Volume 24, Issue 3, June 1957, Pages 203–208, https://doi.org/10.2307/2296070 Published: 01 June 1957

Journal Article A Comment on Dr Klein's Interpretation of Leontief's System Get access Michio Morishima Michio Morishima Osaka Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar The Review of Economic Studies, Volume 24, Issue 1, 1956, Pages 65–68, https://doi.org/10.2307/2296238 Published: 01 July 1956

I. Introduction, 520. — II. A “nonswitching†case, 520. — III. Requirements for the theorem, 523. — IV. Possibility of the atavism, 524.

[There are two types of mathematical economists, one who applies existing mathematics to economic problems (the best example is Court) and the other who anticipates new mathematical problems within economics. Taking Marx as the second type of economist (Section 1), I discuss two of his problems: the fundamental Marxian theorem (Section 2) and the transformation problem (Section 3). In Section 2 I propose a generalisation of the theorem to the effect that the theorem does not need the labour theory of value and hence is independent of any criticisms of that theory. In Section 3 it is seen that the transformation problem is formally identical with the Markov chain process transforming the initial position to the ergodic position.]