> Keynes thought the direction of the rate of profit is to zero. For
> Marx it would take surplus value falling to zero or the composition of
> capital rising to infinity. The first possibility is not worth
> discussing. The second forgets that constant capital is defined on labor
> time and there are major technological improvements in the production of
> constant capital.
Why is the first not worth considering?
In the 70s using national income statistics for the UK I estimated that
around 1976 or so the rate of profit had become negative, after allowing
for stock appreciation.