E. Ahmet Tonak writes: >
Thanks for the appreciation for our work. It was hard work! I'd like to address Jim's objection to our inclusion of "the wages of unproductive labor should be included as a positive number in the numerator of the rate of profit formula." The profit rate, as many other categories in Marx, is a category that is modified (concretized) as you move through different levels of abstraction. The level Jim is referring to is one of the highest levels of analysis. The more concrete level of analysis in terms of the available funds for productive investment (out of produced and re-circulated and already absorbed surplus-value), capital accumulation, i.e. growth rate, effective demand, etc. was also presented in our book (pp.210-16). <
Yes, I'd forgotten about that. The book is in some ways similar to that of Fred Moseley on the rate of profit. He also starts with the rate of profit including unproductive wages as part of the numerator and then moves to the conventionally-measured rate of profit.
Sometime when I have more time, it would be worth discussing the entire issue of the validity of the concept of "unproductive labor." Perhaps not on pen-l...
Jim
