On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 3:24 PM, Michael Perelman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Yes, strong growth, deflation, panic, recurrent bankruptcies, & the response > was > Morganization to put an end to that. I am not sure what the "so what" test > should > be. >
Isn't this basically your argument in Railroading Economics? The issue being that the need to recuperate fixed costs of capital investment led to what you called the "Railroad Economists" to recommend some sort of government granted (and protected) monopoly instead of the free market? In so far as this was adopted, the argument that Jim makes about the "other capitalist" having cheaper tech. is somewhat mooted (though in general it would still hold.) The "so what?" test here would seem to show that, when there is a falling rate of profit because of this, capitalists realize it and appeal to the state for protection--though, I suppose it is difficult to surprise most anyone who pays attention to the workings of the system long enough. s _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
