Yes. And the decoupling is a very important component.
Anthony D'Costa wrote:
Traditionally wealth was always defined in terms of tangible assets, gold for example. While the value of gold or for that matter machines may change nevertheless they are nothing like paper wealth (or fictitious capital), though I have to admit that these days all that is solid also melts into thin air. In fact when we talk about financial sphere are we not really talking about stock market (though there are other elements to this)? After all the speculative element in stock markets tends to decouple stock market valuation substantially from initial paid up capital. Is this not the emergence of fictitious capital, which reproduces itself in capitalist expansionary phase? From this angle it seems the Indian billionaires have lost FC not wealth.
-- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 530 898 5321 fax 530 898 5901 http://michaelperelman.wordpress.com _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
