I dont see a problem with Gils point about some firms
being forced to earn less than the rate of interest on
their capital if prices are determined by average labour
content.
I see little reason to doubt that some firms do earn less
than the rate of interest on their capital. Such firms are
constantly in the position of either:
i) moving to liquidation if they have a high gearing ratio
ii) deciding to accumulate financial rather than material
assets if they have a low gearing ratio
Since both of these things do take place, they can hardly
be held as an argument against a theory that has them as
consequences.