What I call "accumulation through crisis": Department I expands
just because the demand for Department II products is sluggish or
falls -- as companies in both Depts try to protect or restore
profits by lowering costs when faced with a slow growth or decline
in final demand. This is the (crude) beginning of a theory of
capital accumulation from the 1970s (early 70s in Japan, late 70s
in the U.S., 1980s in most EC countries) to the present.
Jim Divine says this model, according to T-B is unstable.
That's for sure. It is also self-defeating because the composition
of capital is higher in Dept I than Dept II -- hence creating
"disproportionality" problems. The way out: bring in Rosa L!
Seems that extensive development, i.e., new proletarianization in
China, India, Mexico, etc., etc., and new markets, are what big
capital and TNCs are counting on! What a rude shock they're in for.
Since China, et.at., want these markets for themselves, e.g., more parts
of a Boeing passenger plane are built in Asia, every year; this is the
price Asian countries makes Boeing pay when they order big passenger
planes by the dozen.
Jim, my T-B burned up a few years ago, when our house burned. Do you
have a reference re: his line on instability when and economy is
Dept I-driven?
Thanks,
Jim O'Connor
