On Sat, 13 Apr 1996 glevy@acnet.pratt.edu [Jerry] wrote:
> > ... If you don't mind, please give me an example in
> > which the employment of labor hours does not grow, but accumulation does
> > take place. An example with s/v constant would be particularly
> > appropriate so as not to get us tied up in distribution issues.
>
> If s/v is constant, but there is an increase in the productive
> consumption of s, then accumulation will increase, ceteris paribus.
How is accumulation DEFINED to achieve this statement?
> If the amount of labor hours is constant, but the ratio of productive
> labor to unproductive labor increases, then accumulation will result,
> ceteris paribus.
Please leave unproductive labor out of this discussion, which must be
around Volume 1 of Capital.
> If the amount of labor hours is constant, but there is an increase in the
> intensity of labor, then accumulation will result, ceteris paribus.
How is accumulation DEFINED to achieve this statement?
> If the amount of labor hours is constant but wages are depressed below
> (or further below) the value of labor power, then accumulation will
> result, ceteris paribus.
How is accumulation DEFINED to achieve this statement?
> If the amount of labor hours is constant but there is an increase in the
> production of relative s through increasing technical change, then
> accumulation will result, ceteris paribus.
How is accumulation DEFINED to achieve this statement?
Thanks, Paul Z.