is likely to rise, and have been reduced to quibbling about your
method of presentation of this point!515. J. E. Meade to Harrod , 16 January 1936 [a]
[Replies to 512 and 514 , answered by 516 ]
Thank you very much for your note and also for your next
Chapter, [1] which
came this morning. I have written a further
note in answer to your note. You will see that in fact I accept
your main proposition that in normal cases
is likely to rise, and have been reduced to quibbling about your
method of presentation of this point!
P. S. I have just read through Chapter 3 rather hurriedly and have got your note on my "four cases". [2] I feel that the part in Chapter 3, which interests me most is the part on the rate of interest [3] my criticisms of which--if any--are already included in my argument about your Relation. [4] I have written a very short note on your Relation and the rate of interest in consequence of reading the first part of Chapter 3. I am afraid that I read the later part--on D.H.R. & time lags and on money generally [5] --very hurriedly as time is beginning to press heavily. But I am sure that it is with your Relation and the rate of interest that I feel most inclined to argue. The rest, I think, I fully accept.