On Sat, 7 Apr 2001, Rakesh Narpat Bhandari wrote:
> Fred, I argue that K is the same for both equations only when Marx is
> expressing the value and price of production for either total capital
> or the synechdocal average commodity.
Rakesh, this is simply not true. Don't you remember this paragraph from
Chapter 9 of Vol. 3 (p. 263), that we have discussed before, in which Marx
clearly states, including again in algebraic terms, that K is the same for
both value and price of production of ALL types of commodities?
"If we take it that the composition of the average social capital is 80c +
20v, and the annual rate of surplus-value s' = 100 per cent, the average
annual profit for a capital of 100 is 20 and the average annual rate of
profit is 20 per cent. For any cost price K of the commodities annually
produced by a capital of 100, their price of production will be K +
20. In those spheres of production where the composition of capital is
(80-x)c + (20+x)v, the surplus-value actually created within this sphere,
or the annual profit produced, is 20+x, i.e. more than 20, and the
commodity value produced is K + 20 + x, more than K + 20, or more than the
price of production. In those spheres of production where the composition
of capital is (80+x)c + (20-x)v, the surplus-value or profit annually
created is 20-x, i.e. less than 20, and the commodity value therefore is K
+ 20 - x, more than K + 20, or more than the price of production. Leaving
aside any variation in turnover times, the production prices of
commodities would be equal to their values only in cases where the
composition of capital was by chance precisely 80c+ 20v."
And don't you remember Alejandro's "missing paragraph" which is just
before the paragraph just quoted in Marx's manuscript, and in which Marx
says again that K is the same in the equations for both the value and the
price of production of all commodities, again in algebraic terms?
"The cost price is, as we see, always smaller than the value of the
commodity. The price of production can be smaller, bigger, or equal to
the value of the commodity. The value of the commodity = the value of the
capital consumed in the production of the commodity plus the
surplus-value. If we take, as in the original development of the cost
price (Chapter 1), cost price = value of the capital advanced in the
production of the commodities, we have the following equations:
value = cost price + surplus-value V = K + s
or profit as identical with surplus-value or = K + p
cost price = value - surplus-value or K = V - s
price of production = cost price + profit P = K + p'
calculated according to the general rate of profit = p'.
Because K = V - s and V = K + s, the value of the commodity is always >
than the cost price. Depending on whether s or p' of each special
production sphere is bigger or smaller or equal, > < or = to the average
profit determined by the general rate of profit, then P > < or =
V. Because V = K + s or p, and P = K = p', V = P when s = p', > P when p'
< s, and < P when p' > s."
It seems beyond dispute that Marx is saying in these passages that K IS
THE SAME for both values and prices or production of ALL commodities, not
just for the total commodity product or average commodities.
As we have discussed, if K is the same for all commodities, then there can
only be "one reason for divergence" between the value and price of
production of all commodities.
Rakesh, your statement quoted at the top surprised me in another way. I
thought you have argued before that, even for the total commodity product,
K DOES CHANGE (i.e. that C and V change) in the transformation of value
into price of production. Since you also argue that the price of
production of the total commodity product is equal to its value, you
concluded that the TOTAL SURPLUS-VALUE WILL ALSO CHANGE, inversely to the
change of K, right?
If you are now saying that K is the same (i.e. K does NOT change) for the
total commodity product, then you must also agree that the total
surplus-value also does NOT change in the transformation of value into
price of production, right? Indeed, I realized on rereading your earlier
(3525) that you explicitly stated just that. You said:
"The difference between total value, as monetarily expressed, and cost
price is the mass of surplus-value which then determines the sum of
profits; in other words, S AND P ARE EQUAL IN THE AGGREGATE." (emphasis
added)
But, Rakesh, this is the main point I have been trying to make all
along! I am very glad that we now seem to agree on this important
point. So what are we arguing about?
I look forward very much to further discussion.
Comradely,
Fred
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Wed May 02 2001 - 00:00:05 EDT