{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01892744479495268, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0012618296529968455, 'mean_word_length': 5.030418250950571, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Economic growth and the genesis of social classes : some Marxian views in a neoclassical framework

The economic theory attempts at explaining the inequality among agents in the long run, but is nevertheless divided between di¤erent traditions and visions of the society. Within a classical and Marxian framework, the capitalist society is divided into social classes dened by the ownership (or the lack of ownership) of the means of production, which gives a power on the decisions of production. According to Marx, beyond the legal equality between the parties to the exchange lies a real asymmetry between those who make the production decisions and do have control on "the hidden abode of production"1 , and those who are deprived of it. Besides, the classical and Marxian tradition admit competitive conditions, at least as a rst approximation: they think that social inequality ts with a perfect working of the markets, it is not a result of market imperfections. By contrast, the marginalist revolution has been associated with the advent of the consumer in the prominent position, in a world where rms are limpid. Without idiosyncratic features (such as various psychological discount rates for example), the question to know on what conditions long run inequality is compatible with a competitive environment remains partly open. The aim of this paper is to show that a simple neoclassical approach, such as Solows canonical growth model, with all its oversimplied hypothesis2 , can nevertheless be accommodated to grasp some features and raise questions relevant to the