On Mon, 23 Apr 2001, Rakesh Narpat Bhandari wrote: > >The "annual rate of surplus value", introduced in Vol. II, should not > >be confused with the ordinary rate of surplus value from Vol. I, and > >only the latter bears the interpretation of a rate of exploitation. > > I am not confusing the two; nor did I forget either. In Vol II Marx > does not call one the annual rate of surplus value and the other the > rate of exploitation. Can you show me where he distinguishes between > the two in this way? Yes. Vol. II, Ch XVI, section 1 (Moscow ed., p. 308): "It follows ... from what has been set forth above that the annual rate of surplus-value coincides only in one single case with the real rate of surplus-value which expresses the degree of exploitation of labour; namely in the case where the advanced capital is turned over only once a year..." There are numerous other places where the same distinction is made or implied, and Marx consisently uses the term "real rate of surplus value" for the ordinary s/v. Allin Cottrell.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Wed May 02 2001 - 00:00:06 EDT