PROTECTED]
Subject: [PEN-L:26582] Re: RE: Re: RE: RE: Estimating Surplus
Eric Nilsson wrote:
Doug wrote,
Net interest is figured as what biz pays to households, right? It's
an expense for business and an income for households.
Yes indeed that is the case. I guess such a number doesn't add
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Doug wrote,
The concept is that households are
the ultimate holder of business debts - financial institutions are
just intermediaries.
It depends on your theory, I guess. What you say above is reasonable from the
point of view of some economists.
I was just
Doug wrote,
I was just citing the convention of the NIPAs. Conceptually, the
people who make up households have to be the producers and recipients
of everything, since corps are just legal fictions, no?
It is a fiction that corporations are quasi-persons. Regardless of that,
corporations are
- Original Message -
From: Eric Nilsson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 10:21 AM
Subject: [PEN-L:26600] RE: Re: Re: Re: RE: Re: RE: RE: Estimating
Surplus
Doug wrote,
I was just citing the convention of the NIPAs. Conceptually, the
people
Part of profits are paid to households too.
I don't see how you can include profits but not net interest paid.
mbs
Doug wrote,
Net interest is figured as what biz pays to households, right? It's
an expense for business and an income for households.
Yes indeed that is the case. I guess
Max wrote,
Part of profits are paid to households too.
I don't see how you can include profits but not net interest paid.
I feel like Reagan, who allegedly was convinced by the last person he talked
with ...
I think I now would include net interest--these payments go to persons (as a
Title: RE: [PEN-L:26574] RE: Re: RE: RE: Estimating Surplus
Doug wrote,
Net interest is figured as what biz pays to households, right? It's
an expense for business and an income for households.
Eric wrote:
Yes indeed that is the case. I guess such a number doesn't
add to capitalist
Eric Nilsson wrote:
Doug wrote,
Net interest is figured as what biz pays to households, right? It's
an expense for business and an income for households.
Yes indeed that is the case. I guess such a number doesn't add to capitalist
surplus.
No but it's a subtraction from it. The concept is
Doug wrote,
The concept is that households are
the ultimate holder of business debts - financial institutions are
just intermediaries.
It depends on your theory, I guess. What you say above is reasonable from the
point of view of some economists.
But in the crude marxist theory I work
