[OPE-L:2207] Avoidable misunderstandings

Alan Freeman (100042.617@compuserve.com)
Tue, 14 May 1996 07:24:00 -0700

[ show plain text ]

Paul (2197)

"I think this is a bit unfair. In response to your point I immediately
drew up a simultaneous model which took into account dynamics. "


I think this is true and in fact I don't even think this is a simultaneous
model. I disagree with the way that this model does determine value
but I don't think it can be characterised as within the simultaneous
paradigm. I think a fruitful way to proceed would be to study this model
more closely.

My contention is that neither rate of profit gets equalised. You have
yet to demonstrate that the historical rate of profit which you equalise
in your approach, can actually equalise.


I think this is unfair on the other side. One point of agreement between
us is that the rate of profit is not equalised.

Since you and ourselves both agree that the profit rate does not
equalise, why not cease castigating us for failing to show how it can?

Unless, of course, you think that this would not be faithful to Marx.

The only reason for exhibiting examples in which the profit rate does
equalise, is to appease those schismatics who will not accept that a
solution to the transformation problem is valid unless it exhibits

As for the reason this should happen, why don't we agree to leave the
explanation of that to the people who think that it does?