---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 1995 16:17:33 -0700
From: DICKENS@unca.edu
To: Multiple recipients of list <pen-l@anthrax.ecst.csuchico.edu>
Subject: [PEN-L:922] Re: Re (PEN-L:853) The strange case of the reserve loan
Alan Freeman points out the inverse relationship between the rate of
interest and profits of enterprise in Marx. I wonder why he calls
this rate of interest a real one. Most of the time, especially in
K. vol 3, part 5, it seems to me that Marx is talking about the
nominal rate of interest, and it seems to me that Alan is too by the
end of his message. Also, Alan suggests that accumulation would "go
faster" if there was no credit system because, then, "less of the
accumulation fund would be gobbled up by injudicious idlers." But
I thought Marx was very clear that the credit system increases
accumulation, by creating fictitious capital. That is to say, the
credit system does not just take (quoting Alan) "resources away from
other capitals, who lend out their capital instead of using it
themselves." The credit system also creates (fictitious) capital,
which has real affects. Although I agree with Alan's summary of
"Marx's point about interest payments in Volume III: They are not
an extra component of capital but a charge on existing capital, a
deduction from value already produced," I also think that, for Marx,
the size of this "deduction" affects future accumulation.
Edwin Dickens