From: Phil Dunn (pscumnud@DIRCON.CO.UK)
Date: Wed Jan 21 2004 - 16:20:43 EST
>Here is a link to a recent paper that contains the argument. >The wage (more precisely the wage interval) is an exogenous parameter to the >model, which is why I remain open-minded on this issue. > >http://www.arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/0401053 > >The abstract is appended. > >ATB, > >-Ian. > Hello Ian As Paul Cockshott said, it is an impressive paper. In my earlier posts about 'Dismal Science' I was not being hostile to the science. It was the feebleness of any possible reformist solutions that struck me. On to your paper. Historical time Am I right that the timescale is set by the average lag of wage payments behind hiring? Profit rate There is no constant capital. Wages are paid in arrears, after revenue is received , therefore there is no variable capital. How then can there be any capital? One possibility is that there is commodity capital which builds up during the month. At the end of the month it will have built up to equal the revenue amount. Nothing to do with wages. On page 24 you quote an average profit rate of 80.5%. This seems to be a monthly rate. Is the annual rate then of the order of 1000%? Income Shares I can only echo what Paul said: it would be very interesting to know what the 55/45 wage share to profit share ratio depends on, i.e. what do you vary to make it change? A very stimulating paper. Phil
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Jan 22 2004 - 00:00:01 EST