[OPE-L:4968] Re: Re: causes of changes in prices of production

From: Paul Zarembka (zarembka@ACSU.BUFFALO.EDU)
Date: Mon Feb 19 2001 - 16:40:42 EST

"Drewk" <Andrew_Kliman@msn.com> said, on 02/19/01:

>The issue is whether the growth of Dept. I can outstrip the growth of
>Dept. II, i.e., overcome the supposed "limits" set by demand for consumer
>goods.  It was obvious to Luxemburg and it is obvious to Paul that the
>answer is "no."  It is obvious to me and to others that the answer is
>"yes."  As somewhat put it at the AHE conference last year (where I posed
>my question to Paul), capitalism *is* production for production's sake.

>In fact, I consider the schemes of expanded reproduction in
>_Capital_ II as *proof* that the answer is "yes."  But neither Luxemburg
>nor Paul accept the proof.  So my motivation in posing my question to
>Paul is to move beyond, to avoid rehashing, the debates of the past. 
>Thus my question was:  how would you test this issue? 

Andrew, I think you mean that the schemes are a BASIS of a proof, not the
proof itself.  The schemes hold the organic composition within each
department fixed as surplus value is converted into additional labor power
and means of production; furthermore, technological change is not included
in the schemes.   In Marx's illustration, growth of Dept. I does NOT
outstrip the growth of Dept. II (see last chapter of Vol. 2, end of the
secton: Marx's "First" illustration -- the more complicated illustration
in which the organic compositions differ between the departments -- grows
10% annually for Dept. I, ditto for Dept. II, and ditto for the total).

Are you thinking of Otto Bauer's schemes as offering the required proof?
Or can you refer to some "other" (your word) who has offered the proof or
cites the proof?  In sum, where do I look for the actual proof you cite in
circumstances of growth of Dept. 1 exceeding Dept. II?

Your question to me is similar to your question to Fred, as I see it, in
that you are looking for a criterion outside of two positions to settle an
issue.  If we get past the above, who decides (a la third thesis on

Paul Z.

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Mar 01 2001 - 14:01:39 EST