[OPE-L:5262] Re: x+a = revenue

Gerald Levy (glevy@pratt.edu)
Sat, 14 Jun 1997 14:24:29 -0700 (PDT)

[ show plain text ]

Andrew K wrote in [OPE-L:5261]:

> "If the annual surplus-value on a capital C = x, for example, the
> cheapening of those commodities that go into the consumption of the
> capitalist may bring it about that x - a is sufficient to procure the
> same means of satisfactions, etc. as before. A portion of the
> capitalist's revenue = a is thus set free and can now serve either to
> expand his consumption or be transformed back into capital
> (accumulation). Conversely, if x+a is required in order to continue
> with the same mode of life, either this expenditure must be restricted
> or else a portion of income = a that was previously accumulated must
> now be spent as revenue" (Karl Marx, _Capital_, Vol. III, Ch. 6,
> section 2, fourth paragraph, p. 206 of Vintage ed.).

Thanks for the very interesting quote from the section on the "Revaluation
and Devaluation of Capital: Release and Tying-Up of Capital". Perhaps we
can get Eduardo to discuss that subject on this list. (NB: the above quote
is part of an explanation of why "the release or tying-up of capital is
different from a release or tying-up of revenue").

Since you go on to say that "statements Marx makes must be understood in
relation to the whole of his work", could you please tell us how your
interpretation of Marx's perspective on revenue fits in with what he wrote
*later* on this subject, e.g. in a) *Volume 1*, Chapter 24, Section 3, p.
738-739 [note, also, footnote 21]; and *Volume 2*, various pages,
including pages 383 (quote from V1), 459-61, 464?

In solidarity, Jerry