[OPE-L:5289] Re: x+a = revenue

Ajit Sinha (ecas@cc.newcastle.edu.au)
Wed, 18 Jun 1997 02:12:32 -0700 (PDT)

[ show plain text ]

At 11:46 AM 6/16/97 -0700, Andrew Kliman wrote:
>I thank Ajit for his ope-l 5267. It was intended to show that my reading of
>the passage is "100[%] false," but it in fact supports what I said 100%!

Not really! The quotation from Marx, which I interpreted, does not support
your interpretation. There Marx is not talking about revenue being larger
than the surplus value.
As I've noted, Fred's reasoning
>implies that, because new capital is "part" of surplus-value, net capital
>investment cannot become negative, and so capitalists can never disinvest in
>value terms!
Fred held that revenue can NEVER
>exceed surplus-value, by "definition*, and Ajit acknowledges that this is

I doubt that this is what Fred's position is. How can one deny that a system
could be run down to the ground. But, then Fred will have to answer your
interpretation of his position. I cannot say anything more about it.

As far as your "difference equation" is concerned. I must admit, I don't
understand what is going on there. But then I'm not much interested in
carring on this strand of the debate. I have to start grading the exams like
a mad man from tomorrow. Cheers, ajit