Re: [OPE-L] Ajit's Paper on Sraffa and Late Wittgenstein

From: Ian Wright (wrighti@ACM.ORG)
Date: Sat Jun 10 2006 - 00:55:16 EDT

Hi Allin

> I'm afraid we are already well within the realm of sophistry with
> the putative distinction between (a) and (b) above.  The
> dimensionality of the rental charge is unaffected by the choice of
> locution:

In a way this is the point. The simple example responds to your
introduction of a distinction between a "rental charge" and an
"ordinary price". If you understand that this is only a putative
distinction then my point is made.

> Time drops out of neither formulation.

I did not claim that any economic quantity has dimensions 1/time.
However, I think either Paul or you did, in the context of suggesting
that the price of money-capital was "economic nonsense" and "off the

You now agree that time is in the denominator of both quantities. Your
initial complaint about the price of money-capital was that it was not
quantitifed with respect to time. I explained no price is ever
quantified with respect to time. Nonetheless, a dimensional analysis
of the return to quantities of money-capital supplied is consistent
with the fact that an actual rate of return is received over a period
of time.

> But since neither of us has succeeded in persuading the other in a
> reasonable number of iterations, I feel there is not much point in
> pursuing this particular topic.

I am always willing to admit when I am wrong. In this particular
instance, however, I think the matter is clear. One day, no doubt, the
boot will be on the other foot.

Best wishes,

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Jun 30 2006 - 00:00:03 EDT