From: Pen-L Fred Moseley (fmoseley@MTHOLYOKE.EDU)
Date: Tue Feb 27 2007 - 23:00:50 EST
Quoting Rakesh Bhandari <bhandari@BERKELEY.EDU>: >> Hi. Solow criticized the assumption of equal rates of SV, on the ground >> that there is no mechanism that can bring about that equalization. He >> contrasted that case with the equalization of profit rates, which, in the >> absence of impediments to the movement of capital, is brought about by >> intersectoral capital flows. >> > > Solow's criticism is trivial, but I suppose his every utterance must be > taken seriously. Marx assumes equalized s/v for no reason other than > convenience of calculation in his transformation. I agree with Rakesh that Marx's assumption of equal rates of surplus-value is merely a simplifying assumption, and is in no way essential. It is strange that Solow would focus on this trivial point. I wonder if Solow brought this up, or was responding to someone else's comment about equal rates of surplus-value? Comradely, Fred ---------------------------------------------------------------- This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Mar 02 2007 - 00:00:10 EST