Rakesh, let Doug speak for himself. Rakesh Bhandari wrote:
> > Doug thinks Marx was an underconsumptionist; at the same Doug > subscribes to the wage led profit squeeze thesis. Doug's an eclectic. > Doug's hostility to value theory derives in part from his rejection > of the significance of the Yaffe, Shaikh, Perlo, and Moseley finding > that despite the so called wage led squeeze on profits, s/v has had > a tendency to rise throughout. > > Doug thinks his theory is radical because it imlies that since the > working class had the ability to choke the profitability of the > working class it may have the power to overthrow the capitalist class. > > But there are empirical problems with the wage squeeze theory raised > by Fred and others, and I don't think Doug has even recognized them. > And I won't here get into why the implications are not as politically > radical as Doug thinks. > > Moreover, that capital accumulation depends on a rising s/v does in > fact disclose the limits of this mode of production since as greater > difficulties are faced in raising the rate of exploitation, the > system comes to itself depend on convulsive crises by which as a > result of the destruction and devaluation of capital the value > composition of capital can be readjusted to the rate of exploitation > such that accumulation can resumed and the realization of surplus > value thereby ensured. On the basis of value theory, it is clarified > that the capitalist way out of crises is not putting more purchasing > power in the hands of workers or simply increasing the rate of > exploitation. If the system as a whole cannot be put right even > through a protracted crisis, then one capital survives ever more only > at the expense of another, yielding slaughterous destruction in the > world market and the political tensions to what gives rise. Barbarism > or socialism. > > RB -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
