----------
> From: Gerald Levy <glevy@pratt.edu>
>
> I fully agree with Fred that "surplus-value is defined as the
> INTRA-PERIOD difference between the price of the commodities produced in
> the given period and the cost of producing these commodities" and also
that
> "REVENUE is defined as a part of this specific intra-period [i.e.,
> surplus-value].
> BUT FROM THIS IT DOES NOT FOLLOW THAT REVENUE CANNOT BE GREATER THAN
> SURPLUS- VALUE, as Fred maintains. In my opinion, Andrew is quite right:
> REVENUE CAN BE GREATER THAN THE AMOUNT OF SURPLUS-VALUE.
>
> This can occur as a consequence of the release of capital and its
> conversion into revenue. In other words, capital released in period t can
> be spent as revenue in period t+1, and consequently capitalist's revenue
> in period t+1 will be GREATER than the surplus-value produced in that
same
> period.
This is the sort of accountancy that would have a company director
jailed for fraud. Consuming your seed corn does not convert it into
revenue, it merely indicates that your consumption exceeds your
revenue.