RE: [OPE] No rise is s/v? Kliman's empirical work on the falling rate of profit

 <4AE1DBCB.5000208@buffalo.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0

> Unproductive labor is also important for s/v considered separately=2C
> which is how I posed the question initially.=20
=20
Hi Paul Z:
=20
Yes=2C no doubt.=20
=20
But=2C let're recall the context in the literature. It's been claimed
by some critics of the tendency for the general rate of profit to fall
that a rising rate of surplus value will prevent a decline in the=20
general rate of profit from becoming an actuality. This can be -
and has been - replied to logically and formally following Marx's=20
explanation of the relationship between a rising rate of surplus value=20
and a declining rate of profit. And=2C it can be replied to empirically.
=20
Clearly=2C Kliman's paper had empirical claims about the tendency for the
rate of profit to fall. His treatment of the rate of surplus value
and his non-treatment of unproductive labor basically invalidates any
empirical claims that he is making about the rate of profit because
he has miss-specified and miss-measured the "V" that is in the denominator
of both the rate of surplus value and the rate of profit. It is for that=20
reason that I think the qualifier "pseudo" is legitimate but I have=20
nevertheless removed it from the subject line as per your request.
=20
In solidarity=2C Jerry =
_______________________________________________
ope mailing list
ope@lists.csuchico.edu
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/ope
Received on Fri Oct 23 14:05:19 2009