How does Marx economics get evaluated in modern economics? As I know, Marx economics did not solve the problem of transformation as Samuelson argued. 

And at least, it has been known as a dead end. 

How does Marx economics get evaluated in modern economics? Is it considered as a kind of pseudoscience or something similar?
Here are some comments on Marx from people who can certainly not be called marxists.


  If Karl Marx and V. I. Lenin were alive today, they would be leading
  contenders for the Nobel Prize in economics. Marx predicted the
  growing misery of working people, and Lenin foresaw the subordination
  of the production of goods to financial capital’s accumulation of
  profits based on the purchase and sale of paper instruments. Their
  predictions are far superior to the “risk models” for which the Nobel
  Prize has been given and are closer to the money than the predictions
  of Federal Reserve chairmen, US Treasury secretaries, and Nobel
  economists, such as Paul Krugman, who believe that more credit and
  more debt are the solution to the economic crisis.  


Paul Craig Roberts,  United States Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy under President Reagan in 1981, Source




  The American economy is still, by most measures, deeply depressed. But
  corporate profits are at a record high. How is that possible? It’s
  simple: profits have surged as a share of national income, while wages
  and other labor compensation are down. The pie isn’t growing the way
  it should — but capital is doing fine by grabbing an ever-larger
  slice, at labor’s expense.
  
  Wait — are we really back to talking about capital versus labor? Isn’t
  that an old-fashioned, almost Marxist sort of discussion, out of date
  in our modern information economy? Well, that’s what many people
  thought;  


Paul Krugman, Nobel Prize in Economic Sciences 2008, Source        




  extraordinary that 100 years after Das Kapital ... so little else
  should have emerged    


Sir John Hicks, Nobel Prize-winning British economist, Source