From: Jerry Levy (Gerald_A_Levy@MSN.COM)
Date: Thu Mar 15 2007 - 10:29:25 EDT
HI Ranga and Bapuji: Consider the following to take place on the aggregate level. Suppose production is continuous rather than only occurring during a production period. This means that capitalists would have already had to purchase some quantity of labor power and means of production in the form of v and c. Now suppose that an _additional_ amount of money is used to purchase _more_ means of production (but _not_ also more v) so that there has been an augmentation of the quantity of c. Can that _additional_ c be said to represent money that is used to make more money? If not, and you still wish to refer to this additional money invested in means of production as capital, then doesn't it follow that capital can not be defined _simply_ as money which is used to make more money? [In more formal terms, suppose that the magnitude of v stays the same and the magnitude of c increases. This is a 'special case' of where the organic composition of capital increases since the OCC has increased here where there has _only_ been an increase in the magnitude of c.] [Although I hadn't thought of it at the time, I think this discussion is related to one that we had years ago with Paul Z about how to define the accumulation of capital. But, I'm not sure if you are familiar with his writings on that topic.] In solidarity, Jerry
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Mar 31 2007 - 01:00:12 EDT