From: Jurriaan Bendien (adsl675281@TISCALI.NL)
Date: Mon Jun 26 2006 - 12:48:39 EDT
I wonder has there been anybody who has systematically compared the differences between Sraffian surplus and Marxian surplus product? From memory, Sraffa's surplus was basically output price less the costs of inputs required to produce it, and then you can relate embodied labour (however construed) to these prices, i.e. there is an accounting and mathematical relationship between the two. In Marx's theory, you had the three basic concepts of surplus labour, surplus value, and realised generic profit, which could all deviate from each other in magnitude, and could not be captured with a tidy accounting sum or a mathematical function except in special cases (involving simplifying assumptions), i.e. you needed an economic theory (a theory of economic behaviour) to understand the ways they would most likely be related. How compatible are the Sraffian and Marxian concepts, really? Paul Baran, an astute thinker, seemed to think that there really wasn't much difference between them, but I suspect that's not really the case. How does Sraffa's theory e.g. deal with firms operating at a loss? In Marx's theory, the firm would have a positive rate of exploitation, a positive rate of surplus value, and a negative rate of profit. But how does Sraffa deal with that? How does Sraffa deal with the fact that, on the commodities which employees buy for their subsistence, there is also a profit impost? Jurriaan
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Jun 30 2006 - 00:00:03 EDT