IMPORTANT: If you cite this message, OPE-L policy requires you not to reveal the identity of the author.
You may cite this message only if you do not disclose who wrote it.
What happens is that the working day via Prim. Accumulation increases to allow exploitation & profit. On Fri, May 30, 2003 at 06:26:05PM +0000, Ian Wright wrote: > I have a basic question that troubles me, which may nevertheless > have a very obvious answer that I'm just not getting. Any help > on this would be appreciated. > > When considering simple circulation at the beginning of Capital > Vol 1., Marx explains, as I understand it, that if (a) the total > money in a closed economy is fixed and (b) exchange is money > conserving then (c) average profits are zero (and he therefore > concludes that profits cannot arise from circulation). Essentially, > any profit is cancelled by another's loss. > > Let's place the possibility of hoarding to one side. > > Marx then discusses how the distinction between paid and unpaid > labour-time accounts for surplus-value. But the introduction of > capitalist exploitation doesn't change the above conditions (a) > and (b). So in this situation, consequence (c) still follows and > we'd expect average profits to be zero (rather than, say, a > uniform positive rate of profit). > > Is there a flaw in this reasoning? > > -Ian. > > _________________________________________________________________ > Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8. > http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail michael@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Fw: What economists do, Rakesh Bhandari Fri 30 May 2003, 19:07 GMT
- zero average profit, Ian Wright Fri 30 May 2003, 18:26 GMT
- Re: zero average profit, Fred B. Moseley Fri 30 May 2003, 20:40 GMT
- Re: zero average profit, Michael Perelman Sat 31 May 2003, 02:53 GMT
- Re: zero average profit, Allin Cottrell Sat 31 May 2003, 04:37 GMT
- China: Neoliberalism destroyed health service (Isabel Hilton), Rakesh Bhandari Fri 30 May 2003, 17:19 GMT
- Re: review of John Holloway, John Holloway Thu 29 May 2003, 04:42 GMT
- <Possible follow-up(s)>
- Re: review of John Holloway, John Holloway Thu 29 May 2003, 15:27 GMT