I'm still outside the sandbox, looking in, but I think the following comment
on Jerry's ope-l 3037 is permissible:
By "sort of," I didn't mean that the equational systems I wrote down were sort
of dynamical but that they sort of confirmed Okishio. That is, they gave
Okishio-like results, but not exactly Okishio's results. Also, contrary to
what Jerry wrote, I didn't say they confirmed the Okishio *theorem*. That
would be impossible, because the theorem is false. A single counterexample
suffices to refute a theorem, and, if one or more has been produced (as they
have), then no amount of examples that confirm the results of the theorem can
confirm the theorem itself.
With regard to the rest of Jerry's post, I'll stay quiet so that others can
begin scribbling. I don't think this is "unfortunate." One step of real
scribbling is more important than a dozen critiques from those who have not
yet scribbled.
In voluntary exile,
Andrew Kliman