Re: Keynes's Cockamamy Economics

[Bruce McFarling <ecbm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I do not follow the following from Gunnar Tómasson

>5.  Considering that "the income of the rest of the community is equal
>to the entrerpreneur's factor cost [such that] aggregate income is equal
>to A - U", it follows that, for the current period, A - U = F.

"income to the rest of the community" = F
"aggregate income" =
	"income to the rest of the community" + entrepeneur's profit
ergo,

A-U = F + entrepeneur's profit.

The conclusion of

>7.  And, with that, "the quantity which is causally significant
>for employment" vanishes into thin air.

follows from the assumption that aggregate income equals the
aggregate of "incomes to the rest of the community" associated
with each entrepeneur's activity, which is simply to assume
entrepeneur's profit to be zero.  Finding entrepreneur's profit
to be zero as a result of assuming it to be zero does not seem to
be to be a real flash trick.

--
Dr. Bruce R. McFarling, PhD
Bus. Office 1.72 -- (02) 4348-4078
School of Business
Faculty of the Central Coast
Newcastle University, Ourimbah