opening   There seems to be a constant push to put neoclassical economics in the opening and make it seem like this covers all economic theory  I dont know if this is due to ignorance or design or both  At least this time its in the fifth paragraph in stead of the first  Calling neoclassical economics modern economics is hopelessly POV  People who agree with the theory are modern what are people who dont antiquated  This was called mainstream economics and it was changed to modern economics  Since the person who changed it complained they did not like the phrase mainstream economics I am changing it to neoclassical economics  It is fine if you dont like the phrase mainstream economics whoever called it that in the first place but dividing economic theories into modern and implictly antiquated for the rest is POV  Then there are the three sentences following that which detail neoclassical economics  Neoclassical economics is one theory your favorite among other theories and putting it at this point means to me that the paragraph describing the difference between these theories must proceed it Another division is between mainstream economics used to distinguish economics in general and heterodox approaches so people understand they are reading one approach to economics not all approaches    Someone wanted to put this neoclassical stuff in the opening and use  words for it  I think it is better to not go into it in the opening but whatever  But if it is put up there the alternative original theory of value deserves more space up top as well  Then we have the modification of that economics primarily deals with the exchange of value and that labour human effort is the source of all value to the ridiculous Thus in Marxs labour theory of value value is considered as a measure of labor exploitation rather than of price  This makes no sense on many levels  does this mean Marx thought an object produced without labor exploitation would have no value  The idea that labor is the source of all value was not an innovation by Marx  Adam Smith David Ricardo and all the early economists agreed on this and Marx simply accepted it