The Cambridge Critique and Professor Schefold: Some Clarifications on the Remaining Disagreements

This is a rejoinder to professor Schefold’s 2022 reply to my 2021–2022 criticism of his views on what is left of the Cambridge critique of neoclassical capital theory. I concentrate on the main disagreements. I find Schefold’s reply unconvincing on the usefulness of aggregate production functions, and also on the empirical evidence of a rarity of reswitching. I clarify better than in 2022 my reasons for rejecting his a priori approach to the probability of double switching. I insist that the impossibility to determine the endowment of capital destroys the neoclassical labour demand curve and the neoclassical investment function, leaving real wages and employment in need of a different theory, which renders a turn to a classical-Keynesian approach inevitable.