Talk:Maurice Dobb

message: This article needs work. There is nothing on his contributions to Marxist theory as such. His work on evonomic history is ignored too, including his role in the debate with Paul Sweezy over the transition from feudalism to capitalism.JimFarm 15:41, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: In my humble opinion Maurice Dobb does not get the treatment he deserves. The focus of this article is on some of the points he made in his Political Economy and Capitalism: Some essays in economic tradition (1937), but this source is nowhere indicated (and I seriously wonder if the 1937 Dobb would have subscribed to most of the interpretations). As I saw above some people want to fight the socialist calculation debate all over again, but I think this is hardly the place. 
Absent are: 1. His important contributions to the history of economic thought, including his work with Sraffa on the Ricardo complete edition, and on economic history. 2. His writings on the Soviet Union. 3. His contributions to "Sraffian" economics. I will try to provide the material for these, beginning with his history of thought contributions. This still leaves the general weakness of the existing text. I suggest that the original authors look at it critically, move general issues on socialist planning and the socialist calculation debate to separate topics, and take out everyting that cannot be directly attributed to Dobb.
And of course I agree with all those who do not wish to see unfounded spy stories here. By the way, I have found the redirect page Dobb pointed to Lou Dobbs. That was a bit (?) odd, so it now redirects to the real Dobb.
All the best, Robertsch55 08:32, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: instead of adding more material, why not add proper source to already existing material. Currently, this article is unverifiable. Vapour  —Preceding comment was added at 10:38, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Still needs a lot of work

message: Is there a reason why Dobb is labelled so clearly and early on in this article as a Marxist? To my knowledge, he wrote extensive critiques of socialist models as well as neoclassical ones, and his respect for Marx's insights could perhaps make him a Marxian, but almost certainly not a Marxist.
213.123.224.244 (talk) 18:28, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Taxonomy and Semantics

message: Is this text copied from Janus (Cambridge Archive) or is it the other way around? --13Peewit (talk) 23:20, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copied 

message: The article neither mentions or references the "Dobb-Sweezy" debate on the transition from feudalism to capitalism. For many, this was their introduction to Dobb, rather than via the economics. This is relevant to a Dobb biography, if not directly his economics.   
Dobb was certainly part of what can be loosely called the Marxian-inspired socialist movement of the early-mid 20th century, but his economics were just as certainly Sraffian, rather than orthodox Marxian, judging from "Theories of Value and Distribution since Adam Smith" (1973), written near the end of his life.
MatthewRusso (talk) 17:13, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dobb-Sweezy Debate 

message: Barbara M Dobb was a member of the London County Council - and there should be a reference to the biography mentioned on  (using this for convenience rather than as a reference per se). Jackiespeel (talk) 15:59, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Second wife and book reference

message: The article said that Dobb was removed as "the" Director of Studies in his college.
I don't think is right. I went to Cambridge a few decades ago and the system  - which I guess hasn't changed all that much - was as follows ...
Lectures are organised by the university faculty for your subject and are not compulsory. The main teaching is in what are called supervisions (Cambridge term for tutorials - you turn up in a small group and discuss the essay you've just written, either after reading it aloud (years ago) or submitted to the supervisor a few days earlier (nowadays)). These are organised by your Director of Studies and you'll get into serious trouble if you don't turn up. You'll probably have a different supervisor for each paper you are taking that year, and as you progress through your degree you may go to supervisors from other colleges for some optional papers. Some supervisors, especially for 1st year undergrads, may be PhD students rather than Fellows. Your Director of Studies collates your supervision reports at the end of each term and gives appropriate feedback. I had a different Director of Studies each year, although he or she was responsible for all the undergrads in that college doing that subject in that year group. (A student also has a Tutor, responsible for his personal welfare - mine was an eminent published historian, even though I wasn't actually studying history).
I suspect that this is what was meant, rather than that Dobb was head of all academic teaching for all subjects in the college (if such a position even exists).
Given that the article referred to the London County Council a few sentences previously as "London's County Council", I suspect this was added (in good faith, no doubt) by somebody unfamiliar with the subject matter.Paulturtle (talk) 03:37, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Director of Studies 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 10:52, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: Mouric dobb - the economic is a micro scope picture of a economic 111.125.221.105 (talk) 15:12, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mouric dobb - the economic is a micro scope picture of a economic