Re: [OPE-L] Incoherence of the TSSI - consensus?

From: ajit sinha (sinha_a99@YAHOO.COM)
Date: Sun Oct 28 2007 - 14:42:41 EDT

--- Ian Wright <wrighti@ACM.ORG> wrote:

 Also the more I study his critique of neoclassical
capital theory the less I am convinced
> that it is successful; e.g. I am persuaded by
> Bidard's analysis of the
> logical coherence of the marginal productivity of
> capital, and have
> followed the recent debates between Samuelson and
> Garegnani with
> interest. It seems to me that Samuelson still
> engages in this debate
> since he is clearly enjoying it.)
Ian, you are not distinguishing between classical
Walrasian GE and the inter-temporal GE. The Walrasian
GE has uniformity of the rate of interest as the
condition of equilibrium and it does require some kind
of notion of aggregate capital independent of the rate
of interest. The inter-temporal GE does not require
uniformity of rate of interest as a condition for
equilibrium and deals with capital as vector of
physical goods. Thus it does not need capital
aggregation. The Sraffian critique applies to the
classical Walrasian GE but not to the inter-temporal
version. When Samuelson talks about GE, he means
inter-temporal version of GE. Garegnani thinks that he
could extent the Sraffian critique to the
inter-temporal version as well, as their version of
savings and investment is not safe from the
reswitching type of problem. On another note, as we
have shown in our 'equilibrium paper' if the condition
of the rate of profits to be uniform must be
maintained, then even in the inter-temporal framework,
input prices must be equal to output prices. Cheers,
ajit sinha

Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Oct 31 2007 - 00:00:20 EDT