Re: [OPE-L] Okishio Theorem - does anyone think it is relevant?

From: glevy@PRATT.EDU
Date: Tue Oct 30 2007 - 16:58:54 EDT

Hi Anders:

If no one thought that it was relevant, then why was
there so much time and effort
allocated to answering it?

> And of course it is the monetary rate of profit we are
> talking about - the only rate that capitalists care about.

Individual capitalists care about the rate of return on investment
(RRI), not the
rate of profit per se.  I believe we had that
discussion, though, before you joined

> That
there always were very strong ideological forces wanted to see
Marx proved false -

and proved true.

> I have not studied the literature around this theorem in depth, and

> it seems to me that in Kliman's book, the chapter on this puts

> forward a quite correct critique using a "dynamics
light" - or
> "quasi-static" model in order to
disprove the Okishio theorem by the
> simplest model possible -
or more precisely - to show that Okishio is
> not relevant for
the dynamic mechanisms that Marx' discusses.
> I must have missed
something in Jerry's line of argument, because to
> me the fact
that wages are zero in Kliman's examples is only a true
simplifying assumption. I fail so see that giving workers a constant
> monetary wage would change anything regarding the relevance of

The question is what the range of conditions
specified by the illustration include.
Clearly, the range includes
the "limit case" of V = 0 but V = 0 is a condition
the limit in that no meaningful formula can be derived from
that case. Thus, "at
the limit" all formula  fall

In solidarity, Jerry

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 02 2007 - 00:00:19 EDT