Re: [OPE-L] Marx on the 'maximum rate of profit'

From: Rakesh Bhandari (bhandari@BERKELEY.EDU)
Date: Wed Oct 11 2006 - 17:18:56 EDT


Ajit, however much I understand is not the question here; the point is
that you have simply reinvented the wheel--do you deny this?

Wow! The real wage can rise while s/v rises and s/c+v falls. You think you
discovered this in a Paris cafe? This is astonishing. I think Sraffian
hubris has really interefered with your understanding of Marx's most basic
insights.

I can't see how this is not clear to everyone on this list other than you.

I guess you won't be answering my three requests for clarification of what
your "propositions" are.


Rakesh



--- 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