On Wed, 25 Apr 2001, Rakesh Narpat Bhandari wrote: > I still think the annual rate of surplus value is not a mere > arithematical side effect, as Allin puts it; with this concept it > can be clarified that if with a halving of production time workers > are not successful in doubling their wages or the flow of variable > capital, they have allowed capital to use their own product to > exploit them at a higher rate.... This is not a clarification, Rakesh, it's a confusion. You're conflating the calendar "time of production" (as in my wine example) with the worker-hours it takes to produce stuff. If the winery workers' wages were doubled, when the labour-time required to produce a bottle of wine has not changed, the rate of exploitation would be substantially reduced (e.g. if s/v were 100% originally, it would now be zero and there would be no profits at all). Marx clearly and consistently links "the rate of exploitation" to the "real rate of surplus value", s/v; and it's not just what Marx said -- he's right! Allin.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Wed May 02 2001 - 00:00:06 EDT