[Marxism] Not 'RoP' but '% of total profits' - duh. Re: US profits collapse in 4th qtr

[Steve Palmer <spalmer999@xxxxxxxxx>]

Jeeze, I'm not that stupid! Just reread what I wrote.

By "% of total profits" I meant ... "% of total profits" - the share of 
absolute profits, not the rate of return. I'm not calculating the ROP - (never 
mentioned it !) - but the geographical origin as a slice of the total profits 
cake. That around 38%* of profits come from abroad is a pretty significant 
fact. This is before adding in licensing, royalties and various other nebulous 
'rents' from abroad which are just surplus-value.

The ROP on foreign investment is generally higher, BTW, as I have demonstrated 
elsewhere, using the same calculations as the BEA does for domestic returns.

'Direct Investment' is defined as having a 10% or greater equity stake. It 
could be financial investment or non-financial. I think people (ie the 'Volume 
1' marxists) somehow think this means it is a direct, wholly owned subsidiary 
of a US corporation. I'd love to have someone explain why they refuse to 
discuss other investment, principally financial, which is a FAR larger piece of 
the pie:
In 2007 US private direct investment abroad totalled $3,332.8 bn out of a total 
of $14,983.7bn - just 22% of the total. Ignoring a cool $11.6 trillion is 
pretty breathtaking.

The BEA focusses on direct investment for reasons best known to itself. Why you 
traipse along behind them so eagerly I have no idea.

Total US exports of goods and services in 2008 was $1,837.8bn. Let's suppose an 
extremely generous 25% of that is profit - say $460bn.
Total income receipts on US private assets abroad was $747.5bn - pure profit. 
Foreign investment is a larger source of profits than trade.
In fact I left royalties, licensing etc under the trade rubric when they really 
should be income on assets ('intellectual property') which makes my case even 
stronger.

The real problem, of course, is that these numbers completely corroborate 
Lenin's definition of imperialism and the domination of finance capital. And 
that seems to be too much for the Stalinist rewriters of history to stomach.

*You missed an opportunity to tell me off for transposing two numbers - the 
percentage should have read 37.9, not 39.7.

--- On Thu, 3/26/09, S. Artesian <sartesian@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Wait a minute-- you are calculating ROP from international
> sources as 
> profits as a percentage of total receipts;  you are
> calculating ROP from 
> domestic as profits as a percentage of GDP-- 
> 
> You're comparing apples not to oranges, but to the
> great pumpkin.


      

________________________________________________
YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
Send list submissions to: Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Set your options at: 
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40archives.econ.utah.edu