> I have a number of objections. Let's begin with a simple one: profits (or, what you call the
> monetary value of the surplus product,) includes 'investment goods'
> No, this is a mistake. Profits do not 'include' anything, they are the total incomes earned by the entire> capitalist class after expenditure on wages and material costs. The problem is precisely the *non-
> equivalence* between profits and the monetary value of the surplus product.
Hi Dave:
Well, I'm confused then by what you wrote in other posts. Maybe you
didn't make it clear whether you were writing about your perspective,
the 'othodox' one, or another perspective? For instance, you wrote
previously that "profits = the monetary expression of the surplus
product" but you also wrote that "[historical materialism, JL] takes
the investment goods and capitalist consumption goods as the 'surplus
product'". Doesn't this literally mean that part of profit is the monetary
expression of the stock of investment goods?
In solidarity, Jerry
_______________________________________________
ope mailing list
ope@lists.csuchico.edu
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/ope
Received on Thu Apr 8 10:46:31 2010
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Apr 30 2010 - 00:00:02 EDT