Re: [OPE-L] Marx on the 'maximum rate of profit'

From: Francisco Paulo Cipolla (cipolla@UFPR.BR)
Date: Tue Oct 10 2006 - 17:38:42 EDT

I do not think the maximum rate of profit argument is a mathematical
tautology since it is grounded on the idea of a rising composition of
capital (rising c/L) which is a historical tendency of capitalism.
Rising rate of exploitation and falling rate of profit go together.
Wasn´t this that Ajit said it was difficult to show?

ajit sinha wrote:

> --- Francisco Paulo Cipolla <cipolla@UFPR.BR> wrote:
> > Jerry, V=0 is not a hypothesis. As a hypothesis it
> > wouldbe unsustainable. The
> > maximum rate of profit is the rate of profit
> > attaining under maximum rate of
> > exploitation, in fact, infinite.
> ______________________
> Actually, maximum rate of profits cannot be infinite
> if there is positive constant capital. You must mean
> rate of surplus value, but then it is not the same
> thing as the rate of profits.
> ________________
> Unfortunately the
> > citation you brought is not
> > related to the issue. In your citation what counts
> > is the rate of profit when
> > wages are squeezed down to a minimum, the
> > physiological minimum. In the
> > maximum rate of profit argument all new value
> > created stands in the numerator
> > and capital advanced in the denominator, the well
> > known L/c, where L is the
> > new value crested and c the constant capital. Then,
> > the argument goes, if the
> > value composition of production c/L (as Shaikh(?)
> > calls it) presents a
> > tendency to increase, the maximum rate of profit L/c
> > must present a tendency
> > to fall. This is the kind of argument Ajit said has
> > never seen in print. It is
> > already there regardless of being right or wrong.
> > Paulo
> ___________________
> When did I say anything like that? What you say above
> is a sort of tautology--how can anyone deny a
> tautology (if c/L is rising then L/c must be falling
> is an elementary piece of mathematics and nothing
> else, there is no theory here). My point was about the
> relative immiseration of labor, that is, the thesis
> that though real wages are rising, the wage share in
> relation to profit is falling simultaneously with the
> long term trend of the rate of profits to fall. Since
> in your above example of c/L, V = 0, it simply cannot
> have any bearing on the problem. Cheers, ajit sinha
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Oct 31 2006 - 00:00:03 EST