In [OPE-L:4677], Julian asked:
“Doesn't demanding equalisation of RRIs amount to demanding an inter-temporal
aspect to the hypothetical long-run equilibrium (in the sense that in the
short run one could have different RRIs on different vintages of capital
even if average profit rates were equalised)?”
My Response: Let me back up a bit before taking a crack at your question.
First, it’s
unclear to me why anyone *today* would think that the rates of profit are
equal or tend
toward equality given the presence of fixed capital. At the very least,
one would have
to make some rather heroic assumptions about the stratification of fixed
capital in order
to give the rate of profit some shred of relevance. I’m reluctant to do
so since such
assumptions may also smuggle equilibrium conditions into the overall
project.
Second, perhaps I'm misreading your question but it seems to suggest that
Marx's
transformation procedure has something to do with equilibrium. If so, I
disagree.
To me he simply shows how surplus value is distributed amoung capitalists.
That is,
surplus value is allocated to each capital in proportion to the amount of
invested capital.
Marx shows us what those allocations would be should the rates of profit be
equal in each
of the 5 sectors depicted.
Our task today is to show what those allocations would be when the RRI's
are equal in
all sectors under consideration. To be sure, this does make the
transfromation problem
an inter-temporal problem. But the very existence of fixed capital gives
the problem this
dimension.
John
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Dec 31 2000 - 00:00:04 EST