[ show plain text ]
> Julian or
P.J.Wells@open.ac.uk wrote:
>
> Marx wrote:
>
> "The habit of representing surplus-value and value of labour-power as
> fractions of the value created - a habit that originates in the capitalist
> mode of production itself, and whose import will hereafter be disclosed -
> conceals the very transaction that characterises capital, namely the
> exchange of variable capital for living labour-power, and the consequent
> exclusion of the labourer from the product. Instead of the real fact, we
> have the false semblance of an association, in which the labourer and
> capitalist divide the product in proportion to the different elements which
> they respectively contribute toward its formation..." (K1 [1967] p. 533).
>
> Given that many heterodox studies do in fact look at the profit share rather
> than the profit rate, what is the import of this habit, and where does Marx
> disclose it?
My perception is that most heterodox studies are not interested in
profit rate or even in profit share. Remember Joan Robinson's
disappointment because she could not find any profit theory in heterodox
economics.
Julian, if you are interested I have a quote from some management person
in General Motors (during 30's) explaining that even profit share were
used in GM for evaluating business performance the right way for do
that should be profit rate. I believe that heterodox economist are
behind accountants on this issue.
--Dr. Alejandro Valle Baeza Div. Posgrado, Fac. Economia UNAM, Ciudad Universitaria Mexico 04510, D.F. (525)6222148, fax (525)6222158 e-amail: valle@servidor.unam.mx
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Apr 21 2000 - 09:47:46 EDT