In 1962, Pasinetti established his celebrated theorem on income distribution, initiating an extensive theoretical debate that continues to shape contemporary inequality research. This article demonstrates that the original derivation contains a fundamental logical flaw: by failing to reconcile the two distinct expressions for the rate of profit that arise from his system (one for each social class), Pasinetti confuses the capitalists' rate of profit with the aggregate rate. His canonical result is not a general theorem, but an overdetermined and mathematically incomplete system that holds only for a parameter set of Lebesgue measure zero. Furthermore, the consistency condition that emerges from this correction reveals a deeper impossibility: a steady state—under the assumptions of exogenous saving propensities, an exogenous growth rate, and investment determining saving—is a zero‑probability event. Models that assume such a steady state are describing a mathematical fiction, not a real economic possibility. The real debate, therefore, is about whether the post‑Keynesian vision can be coherently expressed in a steady‑state model.