Andrew_Kliman wrote: > Ajit Sinha asserted (falsely) in OPE-L 3919 that > > "it can be proven that positive profit is possible if and only if there > is positive surplus value (see Wolfstetter, 1973; Morishima, > 1973, Morishima and Catephores, 1978)." > > This statement is just plain false. What he says can be proven has NOT > been proven and CANNOT be proven. As I have stated and demonstrated > numerous times (see most recently OPE-L 3616), this alleged Fundamental > "Marxian" Theorem of the simultaneists has been disproved. > > No one has been able to refute the disproof. > > A forthcoming paper (by me) in _Capital and Class_, "Simultaneous > Valuation vs the Exploitation Theory of Profit," will make the disproof > known to the world at large. > > I would like to know what Ajit Sinha intends to do to correct his > error. > > Andrew Kliman _________________________ About a couple of months ago in response to my comments on something Mr. Kliman had written on the ope-l, this was the response I got: "Regarding Sinha's attack on Marx -------------------------------- Since he is attacking the author of the example (Marx), not me, I see no need to respond. According to the all-knowing Sinha, Marx's example is "mathematical nonsense," "meaningless," and "nonsensical." I feel honored to be included in Marx's company in this way. As referee on the _Review of Radical Political Economics_, Sinha has used these and similar terms to dismiss my work, and the TSS interpretation of Marx's value theory, in order to justify his and his colleagues' attempts to suppress it and block its publication. If he wants to debate me, *publicly* and *in print*, about the meaning and significance of Marx's work, I am ready. Otherwise I have nothing to say to him." Andrew Kliman This was, of course, not considered flaming by Jerry. Do I have to say anything more? Cheers, ajit sinha ____________
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Oct 31 2000 - 00:00:08 EST