From: GERALD LEVY (gerald_a_levy@MSN.COM)
Date: Fri Nov 02 2007 - 09:30:43 EDT
Hi Paul C: The assumption of perfect constant capital mobility also assumes away both barriers to entry and *barriers to exit*. The latter is particularly relevant for the examples you gave. Also, even if it was possible to disassemble some elements of fixed capital and move them to a new location: a) variable capital would have to be expended to disassemble and relocate the elements of fixed capital; b) there would be transport costs which would either have to paid out to another capitalist firm or covered internally through additional allocation of monies for variable capital (trasport labor), constant circulating capital (energy, etc.), and constant fixed capital (trucks, ships, planes, freight cars, etc.) c) there are certain types of fixed capital (e.g. "hard automation") that were only built for a specific purpose and may only retain value elsewhere as scrap metal). Then, there's the assumption in profit rate equalization theory of the perfect mobility of variable capital. On a regional and national level, there are already obstacles to that mobility. e.g. skill differences in the labor force. Even if workers end up moving to where there is a demand for labour power, there tends to be a significant temporal lag. When one asks about the possibility of profit rate equilization in the world capitalist economy then still other issues arise in relation to the mobility of labour-power. Some of those issues require that one grasp the role of *nation states* in limiting that mobility. There are also additional issues on the international level in terms of the mobility of constant capital: e.g. state export and import limits, special taxes to be paid to export and import (tariffs), etc. In solidarity, Jerry
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 30 2007 - 00:00:03 EST