Re: Surplus Value or Profit

["Forstater, Mathew" <ForstaterM@xxxxxxxx>]

I haven't been following this thread, but if the question is the old one
of "where does the money come from" with regard to surplus value or
profits, I suggest Edward Nell's article on "Monetary Circulation and
the Rate of Exploitation" Thames Economic Papers, reprinted in Arestis'
Post Keynesian Economics collection.  Mat Forstater

-----Original Message-----
From: Gunnar Tómasson [mailto:gunnar.tomasson@xxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Monday, November 19, 2001 12:54 PM
To: POST KEYNESIAN THOUGHT
Cc: John Vertegaal
Subject: Re: Surplus Value or Profit


Re. the following:

Your assertion was that this "final demand inflation" had to
be exogenous; and it seemed to have been your basis for an
ungrounded specific attack on Keynes, as well as a diatribe
concerning the coherence of his reasoning in general.
  If my explication didn't satisfactorally show it to be
endogenous, could you please point out why.

Comment:

The proposition that 'surplus value or profit' can, in principle, arise
within a Closed System - a system where endogenous nominal purchasing
power
arises in the form of factor incomes - is logically incoherent.

Gunnar

----- Original Message -----
From: "John Vertegaal" <vertegaa@xxxxxxxxx>
To: "POST KEYNESIAN THOUGHT" <pkt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: "Gunnar T¢masson" <gunnar.tomasson@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, November 19, 2001 1:30 PM
Subject: Re: Surplus Value or Profit



Gunnar T¢masson wrote:

>Sure - but, IF they 'set prices' at, say, $10 'over [factor]
>costs' of $100, THEN there must be "final demand inflation"
>of $10 or else entrepreneurs cannot realize (a) final sale
>proceeds of $110, and (b) 'surplus value or profit' of $10.

Your assertion was that this "final demand inflation" had to
be exogenous; and it seemed to have been your basis for an
ungrounded specific attack on Keynes, as well as a diatribe
concerning the coherence of his reasoning in general.
  If my explication didn't satisfactorally show it to be
endogenous, could you please point out why.

Furthermore I'd like to indicate that my schema differs from
Keynes only in that he assumes (for practical reasons of
entrepreneurial decision making) that capital values are
determined earlier on; while I think I'm more precise by
placing determination only in ultimate consumption.
  This should make no difference as far as the endogeneity of
"final demand inflation" is concerned, but if you feel there
is, please point that out also.

John V