Maybe I just don't understand Ann's concern.  To me, sunk costs are
irrelevant because value -- and, therefore, money, capital, and financial
wealth in general -- is an expectation.  And I don't understand what Michael
Perelman says: Is the notion of irrelevant sunk costs wrongheaded because
economists confuse stocks with flows or vice versa?  I don't think so.
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

Reply via email to