Addendum to Previous Post

On the basis of what I said in the previous post, it follows that if a theory is based on unrealistic or fictitious assumptions then the theory, in terms of what it purports to represent, is equally an unrealistic or fictitious presentation of things. That's why the core general equilibrium theory of modern orthodox neoclassical economics is often called a fantasy or a piece of fiction by its critics, whether they be Keynesians like Joseph Stiglitz or post-Keynesians like Bill Mitchell or Marxists like John Weeks and Anwar Shaikh, to name just a few.