Re: (OPE-L) Re: s/v & c/v: macroeconomic categories only?

From: Paul Cockshott (wpc@DCS.GLA.AC.UK)
Date: Wed Feb 04 2004 - 11:23:40 EST


  In capitalist mode of production proper (CMP), given the frequent
transfering of value among the existing sectors of the economy (i.e.,
formation of prices of production in conjunction with uniform rates of
profit), one would not know in advance how much value (and thus surplus
value) will be transferred from one sector to another, and which
will be exactly the receivers and which sector(s) the producers of such

This seems to be more an ideal type of a capitalist mode
of production than a real system.

 Moreover, the notion of 'average' sector is an ideal one.  We do
know, however, that those sectors with the larger (than 'average')
advanced are in the receiving end of such 'value transfers'. 

There is some evidence for this, but there is
also evidence for a negative correlation between
sectoral organic compositions and sectoral profit
rates. This undermines your next sentence:
 Thus, both
theoretically and empirically, speaking of the rate of surplus value at
levels of the firm and industry does not make any sense.  The question,
therefore, is not whether the 'relationship' [i.e., statistically]
value and prices is 'weak' or 'strong,' but whether it is conceptually
If prices are as closely correlated to values as they
are to prices of production, then a higher than average profit
to wage ratio in a sector may be explained as the sum of two

1. A contribution due to higher exploitation in that sector
2. A contribution due to sales of the product at a price above
   its value.

It is relatively easy, using i/o tables, to separate out these
two factors.


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Feb 07 2004 - 00:00:00 EST