Date: Fri, 26 Aug 1994 00:18:43 +1000 From: Steve.Keen-AT-unsw.EDU.AU Subject: Re: re:? for Steve Dear Donna, I have discussed this before, but I don't record the chronology of my posts. So I'll attempt a brief reply to your questions: "Marx's concept of extra surplus value is based on the fact that capitals with the most efficient means of production are beneficiaries of value transfer, which is in fact what motivates the productivity revolutions characteristic of the capitalist mode of production. But this transfer operates at the level of many capitals. So isn't the argument that fixed capital or dead labor creates value true only at the level of capitalist appearances--but not for capital as a whole?" The theory I have put forward explains *normal* surplus. not "extra surplus"-- by which I presume you mean a rate of surplus over and above that enjoyed by the average capitalists. Thus it applies at the level of individual firms as well as at the level of capital as a whole. To provide a quotation from Marx which supports the view that this explanation explains normal surplus--and at the level of the individual firm--consider the following: "For the capitalist as buyer paid for each commodity ... its full value. He then did what is done by every purchaser of commodities; he consumed their use-value." (Capital Vol. 1 p. 189, Progress Press) I could elaborate, and provide additional similar comments; but take the above as representative. As for an explanation of "extra surplus", that is a question for evolutionary and dynamic analysis--rather a long way down the track from trying to establish a basic theory of value. Your second question: "Also, when you argue that fixed capital is productive of surpluses, do you mean productive of use-values or value--that it transfers more than its own value?" I mean the latter: it transfers more than its value. While that assertion looks bizarre from the perspective of a labor theory of value, it is the only logical conclusion from applying Marx's use-value/exchange-value analysis. On that front, see my JHET 1993 Vol 15 No.2 paper. For more detail, you would need to consult the thesis I've posted to the ftp site. Cheers, Steve Keen ------------------
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005