Mat, for some reason the inequality symbols didn't come through. On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 8:11 AM, Forstater, Mathew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > I don't know these specific arguments, but I would bet they are the > conventional one that says that, since the value rate of profit is: > > > > s/(c + v) > > > > then it is equal to: > > > > (s/v)/[(c/v) + 1] > > > > The numerator, s/v, is the rate of surplus value, and c/v is the OCC. > > > > This is interpreted as implying: > > > > > >that, in the abstract, expanded > > >reproduction with a growing organic composition can go on *forever* as > > >long as the surplus value rate is also allowed to increase. > > > > BUT: > > > > Define Marx's notion of "living labor" as: > > > > L = V + S > > > > His notion of "dead labor" = C > > > > Then the value rate of profit: > > > > [S/(C + V)] = [(L-V)/(C+V)] > > > > This allows us to determine the upper and lower bounds of the rate of > profit: > > > > As more total labor time becomes paid labor time: > > > > V à L and > > r à 0 > > > > As more and more total labor time goes to surplus value: > > S à L > > V à 0 and > > r à (L/C) > > > > Now we are ready to state the: > > > > Proof of the Law of the Falling Tendency of the Rate of Profit (LFTRP) > > > > rmin = 0 > > > > rmax = (L/C) > > > > (rmax - rmin) = [(L/C) – 0] = (L/C) > > > > This is the profit rate band. > > > > If, over time, (C/L) is rising (and (L/C) is falling), then the profit rate > is being squeezed downward. > > > > This has nothing to do with what is happening to (S/V), because (V + S = L). > In fact, Marx thought that the LFTRP was associated with a rising (S/V). > > > > (Of course, this can be explained and is not simply a mathematical > argument.) > > > > This is from Anwar Shaikh's Columbia University doctoral dissertation, > available at his New School website. Shaikh's thought was influenced by > Grossman. > > > > > > > Julio wrote: > > >This is wrong! Krasnov and Fridman [and Oskar Lange and others] show > > >that, in the abstract, expanded reproduction with a growing organic > > >composition can go on *forever* as long as the surplus value rate is > > >also allowed to increase. > > > > Tugan-Baranovsky said the same thing: > > > > "Even if all workers were replaced by machinery except for one worker, this > single worker would be able to put into motion the vast mass of machinery, > and with its help create new machines–and means of consumption…The working > class could disappear; this would not disturb in the least the > self-expansion of capitalism." > > > _______________________________________________ > pen-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l > >
-- Jim Devine / "Segui il tuo corso, e lascia dir le genti." (Go your own way and let people talk.) -- Karl, paraphrasing Dante. _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
