Refuting Samuelson's Capitulation on the Re-switching of Techniques in the Cambridge Capital Controversy

Abstract

Paul A. Samuelson's (1966) capitulation during the so-called Cambridge controversy on the re-switching of techniques in capital theory had implications not only in pointing at supposed internal contradiction of the marginal theory of production and distribution, but also in preserving vested interests in the academic and political world. Based on a new non-switching theorem, the present paper demonstrates that Samuelson's capitulation was logically groundless from the point of view of the economic theory of production.