From: ajit sinha (sinha_a99@YAHOO.COM)
Date: Thu Oct 12 2006 - 09:56:22 EDT
--- Paul Zarembka <zarembka@BUFFALO.EDU> wrote: > > Generalize this case to agriculture as a whole, as > > Ricardo did. You can have a rising organic > composition > > of capital with either fall or no increase in > labor > > productivity. > > Even in Vol. 1 Marx discusses the possibility of a > falling c/v in ag. and > mining (Chp. 24, Sect. 4). Statements about the > necessity of rising c/v > amount to dogma. ________________________ Paul, I'm not concerned with empirical question. I'm only concerned with the logical possibility. And in any case, something does not become a dogma simply because Marx said so. My sense is that empirically also in agriculture and mining hstorically the C/V must have been rising. _____________________ > > > You should > > note that it is well accepted that the formula for > the > > rate of profits as S/(C+V) is wrong, so you need > to > > check Sraffa to see whether the proposition you > think > > is obvious is all that obvious or not. > > Ajit, please tell us in what respect S/(C+v) is > wrong according to > others. There are a lot of dimensions of this issue > and I cannot tell > which you are referring to. ________________________ Simple, capital cannot be measured by direct and indirect labor-time. Cheers, ajit sinha > > Cheers, Paul > __________________________________________________ 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