[OPE-L:5460] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: turnover time and surplus value

From: Rakesh Narpat Bhandari (rakeshb@Stanford.EDU)
Date: Sun Apr 29 2001 - 13:25:33 EDT

re 5458

>Re Rakesh's [5453]:
>>  Jerry, I don't understand what you all mean
>>  [in 5451, JL] by constant circulation
>>  capital--is this raw materials or unfinished
>>  goods? thanks for the clarification.
>Think of it as was referring to raw materials
>although I think it would also be the case for that
>proportion of other constant circulating capital
>inputs which are being 'stocked' and are lying
>'fallow' (for example, an excess stock of
>intermediate goods).
>In solidarity, Jerry

again the question comes down to what the VCC measures; in my opinion 
it measures the value of the constant capital advanced for any 
production period (depreciated equipment, raw materials, intermediate 
inputs) over the value of the variable capital. The VCC is neither a 
dimensionless flow measure nor an annual accounting of embodied labor 
hours to persons. It simply measures a ratio of two different aspects 
of the value of the capital advanced for a given production period.

In my example of a halving of production time the VCC actually 
increased, yet the profit rate rose. This was due to a doubling of 
the annual rate of surplus value which cannot in any way be 
decomposed into a reduction of the VCC. One could argue that an 
increase in the annual rate of surplus value simply indicates a 
faster turnover. That is, I may be wrong to describe the situation as 
heightened exploitation. This is a quite plausible argument, but a 
reduction in the VCC is not.

I may simply be missing the point which you, Allin, and Paul are 
making. And I apologize for this if I am resisting the obvious.

YOurs, Rakesh

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