[OPE-L:4468] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: what is Volume 1 about?

From: Allin Cottrell (cottrell@wfu.edu)
Date: Mon Nov 06 2000 - 14:12:50 EST

On Mon, 6 Nov 2000, Rakesh Narpat Bhandari wrote:

> In the B-S-Cottrell models, the first two Depts have a relatively
> higher OCC than Dept III. The equalisation of the profit rates means
> then that their prices rise relatively. Since these two depts provide
> the inputs for all depts, cost prices are raised by the equalisation
> of profit rates.
> This now means total value is resolved into
> (1) (cost price + a) + (surplus value - a)

This move makes total profit = total surplus value by
construction.  It also makes "total surplus value" come apart
from total surplus value in the original value table, total
surplus value in value terms.  Thus it just displaces the
problem, rather than solving it.

> For example, Marx discusses how "the increase in wages would affect
> the unpaid part of total labour, and with this the SURPLUS
> VALUE...The SURPLUS VALUE, firstly, falls by a third of its former
> amount, from 150 to 100." (see Capital 3, p. 995 vintage). That is,
> since total value is resolved into cost price and surplus value, an
> increase in the former due to a rise in the wages leads to a fall in
> the latter.

This is irrelevant to your claim.  Of course a rise in wages
(cet. par.) reduces surplus value, since it raises the necessary
labour-time and cuts into surplus labour.

Allin Cottrell.

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Nov 30 2000 - 00:00:04 EST