[OPE-L:5407] Re: Re: turnover time and surplus value

From: Allin Cottrell (cottrell@wfu.edu)
Date: Tue Apr 24 2001 - 08:19:30 EDT

On Tue, 24 Apr 2001, Rakesh Narpat Bhandari quoted me:

> >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.

And wrote:

>   ... I read the passage which you quote to be underlining that
> real rate of exploitation expresses the degree of exploitation
> only when the advanced capital is turned over once a year.

That is, you choose to "read" the opposite of what Marx actually says.
Sheesh. In the example that Marx constructs, where one capital has an
"annual rate of surplus value" of 100% and the other one 1000%, due to
differing turnovers, yet they both have s/v = 100%, Marx clearly
states that the "degree of exploitation" is the same in the two cases.


This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Wed May 02 2001 - 00:00:06 EDT