I now understand what you meant. However with a quick search, you can find 14 references to Ricardo (granted, in the footnotes) just in Capital, part one, chapt

I now understand what you meant. However with a quick search, you can find 14 references to Ricardo (granted, in the footnotes) just in Capital, part one, chapter one [0]. I think it's telling how most of the Smith and Ricardo followers celebrate how prescient they were, excluding the labor theory of value when they embrace marginalism [1] instead. I guess it must be more convenient for them. [0] https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/ch01.htm https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/ch01.htm [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoclassical_economics#Marginal_revolution https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoclassical_economics#Margina...