[PEN-L:32476] RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: The Economics Biz

["Devine, James" <jdevine@xxxxxxx>]

Title: RE: [PEN-L:32473] Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: The Economics Biz

I wrote:
> >it's not totally off-base, since Marx assumed the validity of Say's
> >Law throughout most of volume I of CAPITAL after chapter 3. He
> >argues there that higher profit rates encourage faster accumulation,
> >which raises GDP growth.... a very "supply side" view. (What they
> >miss are the contradictions of this process.) Finally, Marx assumed
> >that gold was the basis for international money, which arguably made
> >sense empirically at the time.

Doug:
> The Marx of vol 3 wasn't quite this classical though, was he?

no way.

> But my point was political - I doubt that Marx would be agitating for
> lower marginal tax rates and elimination of the capital gains tax.

one might interpret the volume I Marx as saying that cutting taxes for the rich would raise the rate of profit, encouraging accumulation, growth, etc. But one would be wrong.

Unfortunately, volume III was never finished. Nor was the book on wage labor, since CAPITAL is all about the political economy of capital. The active struggle by labor isn't really dealt with seriously.

Jim