[ show plain text ]
Riccardo wrote in [2443]
>>
And we may answer that the entrepreneur needs to be 'heroic', since he
>is always pressed: (i) by the potential contestation from workers; (ii) by
>the competion of other capitals. Schumpeter sees only (ii) - though in
>Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy he comes very near to recognize (i).
>What is sure is that a capitalism with normal profits, equal in all
>sectors, and may be on a balanced growth path, is not Marx's.
Please note the difference in the level of abstraction. Throughout Capital,
vols I, II and the first part of vol III Marx remains at a very high level
of abstraction. For instance: the law of value holds (this means no
disequilibrium); surplus value = profit (this enables him to isolate the
production process as the locus of exploitation).
Interesting enough, techinal progress is investigated at this high level of
abstraction. Yet I dare say that the basic Marxian theory of exploitation
can be set out in an analytical context in which no technical progress is
assumed (only absolute surplus value is produced).
>
>
>BTW: Ernesto, I'm happy for the agreement arising out of the other two
>answers from you.
Incredible, isn't it?
Ernesto
Ernesto Screpanti
Dipartimento di Economia Politica
Piazza S. Francesco 1
53100 Siena
tel: 0577 232784
fax: 0577 232661
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Apr 21 2000 - 09:47:56 EDT