[OPE-L:5456] Re: Re: Re: Re: turnover time and surplus value

From: Gerald_A_Levy (Gerald_A_Levy@email.msn.com)
Date: Sat Apr 28 2001 - 18:50:16 EDT

Re Rakesh's [5452]:

> Jerry, again I am going to have to think through
> this; in your  example, we have a reduction in
> turnover due to a reduction in
> circulation, not production, time, correct?

In [5449], yes.  In [5441], my 1st paragraph
referred to a reduction in turnover time due to
a reduction in circulation time. The 2nd paragraph
introduced another possibility.

> So I have to think
> through whether these two sources of reduction > in turnover time have
> different effects on the OCC and the annual and > real rate of surplus

Well, my point was to show how a reduction in
turnover time could increase the mass of
surplus value and profit even when the rate
of surplus value and the OCC remain constant.
This means that it must be taken as an
independent variable rather than being de-
composed into either the rate of surplus value
or the composition of capital. However, as I also
noted in the second paragraph of [5441],
a reduction in turnover can *also* manifest itself
-- where e.g. there is a reduction in constant
circulating capital -- through a decreased OCC.

Wether the annual rate of surplus value is
changed depends, c.p., not on the turnover time
but on the proportions in which c and v are
invested in the next period.

> As I quickly read over your example, this is
> what struck me about a
> reduction in turnover time in general:
> The rate of profit is calculated over some period > of calendar time.

(or logical time)

> Let's assume that there are certain minimum
> capital requirements for
> further accumulation of new means of
> production, and that this
> minimum mass of surplus value cannot be
> amassed out of one turnover
> of capital. So part of the depreciation fund is idle > until it becomes
> big enough to be laid out again on new means of > production.

This might be an example of the 'fallow'
money-capital that Grossmann was referring to.
Recall that he mentioned three different forms
of 'fallow' capital.

> Now of course the more production and
> circulation time is cut, the
> less time the depreciation fund which is in the
> form of money capital
> has to remain idle. Capitalists will have on hand > sooner the mass of
> surplus value they need to accumulate new
> means of production

(and additional v)

> and
> with the new means of production they will be
> able to appropriate a
> greater mass of surplus value in a given calendar > period and thus
> increase their rate of profit.
> So a reduction in turnover time here reduces not > so much fallow
> commodity capital but reduces how long the
> depreciation fund has to
> remain idle  before it can be converted into a
> form by which surplus
> labor can be appropriated.

This is another possibility (that I will have to
think about some more).  My point, though,
wasn't that this way in which there was a
reduction in turnover time [caused by a
reduction in circulation time and with it a
freeing-up of  money-capital that had
previously taken the form of commodity
capital]  was the _only_ way in which
turnover time could be reduced -- rather it
was _1_ of  the forms in which turnover time
could be reduced.

> Of course a further complication is that the
> depreciation fund (if I
> am using the correct term) is never truly idle; it
> may be kept in a
> money market fund.

True. This would not be the case for the other
forms I mentioned.

Good luck moving and finding a new living
space. I know you don't want to discuss rent
now, so maybe we should discuss the
mobility of labour-power and how there are
important restrictions on that mobility in

In solidarity, Jerry

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