John:
>
>4.
>Given 1-3, it would seem that the driving force behind
>"moral depreciation" is not cheaper machines, but "better
>machines."
>
I cannot understand the point. To my eyes, the conclusion
would be that the driving force behind "adopting new machines"
is not cheaper machines, but "better machines".
Isn't it simply moral depreciation that capitalists fully depreciate
the existing machines when new cheaper machines appear?
I understand John's expression "full depreciation when cheaper
machines produced" as following example. Is it right?
1st term: machine worth $100 (its physical life is assumed 10 years)
2nd term: same machine produced at $70
the full depreciation should be $40 ($10 for physical, $30
for moral)
in OPE-L solidarity,
Iwao
----------------------
Iwao Kitamura
E-mail: ikita@st.rim.or.jp