From: Paul Zarembka (zarembka@BUFFALO.EDU)
Date: Sun Jan 06 2008 - 22:12:31 EST
Jurriaan,
Some day you might have a look at my "Accumulation of Capital, Its
Definition: A Century after Lenin and Luxemburg", RESEARCH IN POLITICAL
ECONOMY, VOL. 18 (2000). I argue that Marx's own conceptualization is
rather ambiguous but does lead to a suggested solution, departing from both
yourself and the Glossary.
Paul Z.
************************************************************************
(Vol.23) THE HIDDEN HISTORY OF 9-11-2001 "a benchmark in 9/11 research"
video summary from Snowshoe Films at http://snowshoefilms.com
(Vol.24) TRANSITIONS IN LATIN AMERICA AND IN POLAND AND SYRIA
********************* http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/PZarembka
--On 1/7/2008 1:07 AM +0100 Jurriaan Bendien wrote:
> From what I have written previously, it should be obvious that I disagree
> with his definition of "accumulation of capital".
>
> The accumulation of capital is generally simply the process whereby a sum
> of
> money-capital is transformed into a larger sum of money-capital. This need
> not involve investment in production at all, since it can occur simply
> through trade in various forms, as Marx illustrates in Cap. Vol. 1 with
> the
> circuit M-C-M', or through robbery in various forms (as in primitive
> accumulation). Empirically, the accumulation of capital is measured by the
> increase in the stock of capital assets owned across time.
>
> I regret to say I find all of the definitions given by Ed George
> insufficient, questionable or mistaken in some respects, but I lack the
> time
> to improve them.
>
> Jurriaan
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Jan 31 2008 - 00:00:06 EST