From: Rakesh Bhandari (bhandari@BERKELEY.EDU)
Date: Wed Oct 11 2006 - 16:24:23 EDT
> --- ajit sinha <sinha_a99@YAHOO.COM> wrote: > >> --- Francisco Paulo Cipolla <cipolla@UFPR.BR> wrote: >> >> > I do not think the maximum rate of profit argument >> > is a mathematical >> > tautology since it is grounded on the idea of a >> > rising composition of >> > capital (rising c/L) which is a historical >> tendency >> > of capitalism. >> > Rising rate of exploitation and falling rate of >> > profit go together. >> > Wasn´t this that Ajit said it was difficult to >> show? >> > Paulo >> ____________________________ >> Paulo, let me first quote you. You wrote: "Then,the >> argument goes, IF the value composition of >> production >> c/L (as Shaikh(?) calls it) presents a tendency to >> increase, the maximum rate of profit L/c must >> present >> a tendency to fall." (emphasis added). Your >> qualifyer >> "if" makes your statement almost a tautology. Why >> did >> I say almost and not a tautology? Because a pure >> tautology would be a statement such as: 'either it >> is >> raining or not raining'. This statement, though >> gives >> you no information about the weather, is always >> true. >> Your statement is always true but on the condition >> that the elementary methematical law that if the >> value >> of a ratio is rising then its inverse must be >> falling. >> So for all practical purposes it is a tautology, but >> since a philosopher could protest, I took the >> measure >> to protect against such criticism by calling it >> almost >> a tautology. >> >> Now you say, "Rising rate of exploitation and >> falling >> rate of profit go together. Wasn´t this that Ajit >> said >> it was difficult to show? >> >> First of all, since you have put your V = 0, which >> means the rate of exploitation is infinite even if >> the >> working time is one second, the concept of "rising >> rate of exploitation" is meaningless. In any case, >> what the rate of exploitation has got to do with >> rising rate of composition of capital? And why >> cannot >> you understand my proposition which you are making >> me >> repeat time and time again? Let me repeat it for the >> last time. My proposition is: show me how the three >> tendencies exist together: (1) real wages, i.e. >> wages >> in terms of goods and services, is rising; (2) the >> share of wages in net income, which is divided >> between >> capitalists and workers, is declining; and (3) the >> rate of profits on capital investment is declining. > ______________________ > This evening in a Paris café I tried to work this out > myself. Of course in a limiting case when rate of > profits tend to zero, the share of profit in the total > net output will also tend to zero. However, if we > start from a high level of rate of profits and assume > that all the surplus value is invested mostly in > increasing the constant capital and very little in > increasing the variable capital with productivity > rising just to the extent that the rate of profits > falls slightly, this trend could be maintained for a > long time. Of course, a time has to come when the rate > of profits become small enough that the share of wages > begin to rise vis-a-vis the profit in the net output. > But the mathematical possibility of the three trends > existing simultaneously for some time cannot be > denied. Cheers, ajit sinha > Ajit, You didn't have to work this out; it has been long understood that these three trends (plus two) could exist simultaneously. Why are you reinventing the wheel on this list? It is inappropriate that you question the reading knowledge of others while you don't seem to have read Howard and King's two volumes or at least much beyond the second chapter of the first volume... Rakesh > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Oct 31 2006 - 00:00:03 EST