From: ajit sinha (sinha_a99@YAHOO.COM)
Date: Wed Oct 11 2006 - 16:53:23 EDT
--- Rakesh Bhandari <bhandari@BERKELEY.EDU> wrote: > > --- 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 ________________________ Rakesh, I don't think you understand much of anything. It was my mistake to engage with you after ignoring you for a long time. Now from now on, as most of the others do, I'll simply ignore you for good. ajit sinha > > > > > > > > > __________________________________________________ > > Do You Yahoo!? > > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam > protection around > > http://mail.yahoo.com > > > __________________________________________________ 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