Date: Thu, 29 Sep 1994 09:50:35 -0400 (EDT)
From: Louis N Proyect <lnp3-AT-columbia.edu>
Subject: Re: Labor theory of value debate


Dear Steve Keen,

US corporations in Europe between 1950 and 1965 invested $8.1 billion and 
made $5.5 in profits, in Latin America they invested $3.8 billion and 
made $11.3 billion in profits, and in Africa they invested $5.2 billion 
and made $14.3 billion in profits.

American corporations depend on third world countries for 100% of their 
diamonds, coffee, platinum, mercury, natural rubber and cobalt. They get 
98% of their manganese from these countries, 90% of their chrome and 
aluminum. 20 to 40% of certain critical imports (platinum, mercury, 
cobalt, chrome, manganese) come from Africa.

Doesn't it appear that US corporations rely on the third world for 
sources of super-profit? Isn't it clear that resistance to 
superexploitation is a major cause of violence in the third world? The 
placid, welfare-state model that you propose as a model is not in the realm 
of possibilites for Brazil, Nigeria, Indonesia, etc. If your economic 
theories are relevant, they must be relevant to the whole planet.

Louis Proyect

On Thu, 29 Sep 1994 Steve.Keen-AT-unsw.edu.au wrote:

> My comment was that the above wasn't "necessary" for American,
> European and Japanese corporations to achieve profits in the first
> instance--what I said was debatable was whether these profits would
> be higher or lower because of them. Exploitation of resources from
> the TW means lower cost inputs; but it also means no possibility
> of realising surplus by selling to them. So exploitation cuts both
> ways.
> Cheers,
> Steve Keen
> 


     ------------------