[ show plain text ]
In  Ernesto wrote
> When Samuelson says "zero profits" he means that a normal "profit",
> remunerating a director's work, is included in costs. But even if you
> that the director's wage is nil, the result does not change.
Is this really what Samuelson says -- normal profits are wages?
Isn't this a rather different tale to that normally told by orthodox
economists about normal profit?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Apr 21 2000 - 09:47:47 EDT