Ahiakpor claims that I am mistaken in holding that according to contemporary macroeconomics, the value of final products counts not only itself but also the value of the intermediate products. He declares: "National income accountants don't say that the value of the final product counts itself plus the value of intermediate products." If that is not what they say, then on what basis do they claim that counting the value of the intermediate products constitutes "double counting"? That belief presupposes the belief that the value of the final products already counts the value of the intermediate products. If the value of the final products does not in fact count the value of the intermediate products, in addition to that of the final products themselves, which is precisely what I claim, then it cannot be double counting to go out and count their value. Ahiakpor ignores the substance of my article, above all its demonstration of the violations of mathematical law present in contemporary macroeconomics' claims about double counting. The violations are the jettisoning of parts of equations and then the addition of remainders of equations that are mutually exclusive and therefore not properly subject to addition. This procedure is what is required to reach the conclusion that the value of final products counts in addition to its own value the value of the intermediate products. Ahiakpor appears to believe that my criticisms can be set aside by first denying the undeniable fact of what contemporary macroeconomics claims about double counting and then substituting the words "include" or "cover" for the word "count." Thus, he writes, "What is stated in national income accounting is that the value of the final product already includes or covers the value of the intermediate goods."
展开▼
