Interesting exchange on overproduction (from psn-l)

["Charles Brown" <cbrown@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

From: "dmschanoes" 

Hello David,

I may repeat here some things from the last time you and I discussed this a
little.


Dms: But regarding underconsumption--  The weakness in the argument about
underconsumption is that is at core an argument of supply and demand 

^^^^^^
CB: I don't know if you read my last post , but how is my argument at core
regarding supply and demand ? What do you make of my claim that
underconsumption is directly implied by exploitation ? In other words, it is
an argument which at its core concerns exploitation.
^^^^^

and has nothing to do with the historical development of overproduction and
why it ever occurs, must occur, with such important consequences for
capital.

Capital cares nothing for consumption.  It produces for the production of
exchange value, for profit and not with consumption or use ever in mind. 

^^^^^^
CB: Doesn't it have to care about realization of surplus value ? No
realization, no profit , no ? The "consumption" of "underconsumption" is not
related to use value, it is related to realization of surplus exchange
value. 

^^^^^^^


The problem then for capital becomes one of expanding reproduction,
expanding the social relationship of production that animates the means of
production through the aggrandizement, the expropriation, the alienation of
labor.  It is in the alterations of that internal relationship that we can
find the surest evidence and meaning to overproduction.
^^^^^^^^

CB: What about the exploitation of surplus value and its realization in sale
?




~~~~~~~
PLEASE clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.