[OPE-L:3025] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Defining accumulation

From: Paul Zarembka (zarembka@ACSU.BUFFALO.EDU)
Date: Sat May 06 2000 - 07:52:02 EDT

[ show plain text ]

Accumulation is driven by growth of the living labor portion, the portion
which produces value and surplus value, not the dead labor portion --
corresponding to a theme in Vol. 1 -- "accumulation of capital is,
therefore, increase of the proletariat". Thus, the conclusion of my
paper. The extent to which it has been achieved or not achieved needs to
be asked in a global context, but any empirical results do not condition
(as in "disadvantage" to one definition or another) the definition.

On your second point, accumulation of capital of course refers to much
more than the falling rate of profit.

Paul Z.

******************** http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/PZarembka

Paul Cockshott <wpc@dcs.gla.ac.uk> said, on 05/05/00 at 12:30 PM:

>>You are a little me trying to use me against myself, but what I wrote is
>>that Marx's concept is ambiguous and I am strugging against the ambiguity.
>>Toward the end of section one I begin a struggle against a definition of
>>accumulation of capital being growth of either constant capital, c, by
>>itself, or c +v.

>If accumulation is growth in c + v it is then since these are flows, the
>dimension is number of persons, accumulation is then identical with
>growth of the employed population of productive workers. In these terms,
>accumulation has not occured in the UK since the late 1950's.

>If accumulation is growth of capital stock, accumulation has fluctuated
>between being positive and negative over the

>Disadvantage of first defn is that it generally treats developed
>capitalism as being non-accumulating.


>You are offering an alternative definition: "accumulation of capital is
>growth of constant capital, c"? If so, what is the difference between
>yourself and neoclassical economics on accumulation, other than the unit
>of account?

law of falling rate of profit is difference

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed May 31 2000 - 00:00:07 EDT