Marx also disregards Mill's assumption that constant capital can be produced without also using constant capital. He assumes, therefore, that, in the production of the 60 kilos of constant capital, 20 kilos of constant capital (equal to 10 day's labour) is used, along with 20 day's of labour to process it into the 60 kilos of constant capital, which thereby divides into 20 kilos (10 days) wages, and 20 kilos (10 days) profit.
Looking at the total production, for the integrated capital, therefore, it comprises 20 kilos of constant capital, which is processed into the means of production, by 20 workers, which are in turn used by a further 60 workers, who turn them into the final output of 180 kilos of corn. So, in total, 80 workers are employed, and are paid wages of 80 kilos (40 days). These 80 workers, with a rate of surplus value of 100%, produce 80 kilos of surplus value (40 days). So, the total value of output is 20 kilos (10 days) constant capital + 80 kilos (40 days) wages + 80 kilos (40 days) profit. The capital advanced is then 100 kilos (50 days) and the rate of profit is 80%.
Marx sets this out in the following table.
Constant
Capital
|
Variable
Capital for 80 workers
|
Surplus-value
|
Total
Product
|
20
Kilos
|
60+20=80
Kilos (wages for 80 working-days)
|
60+20=80
Kilos.
|
180
Kilos.
|
(10
working-days)
|
(=40
working-days)
|
(=40
working-days)
|
(=90
working-days)
|
“The actual production costs of wages have remained the same, and consequently the productivity of labour too. The total product has remained the same, that is, 180 quarters, and the value of the 180 quarters has also remained unchanged. The rate of surplus-value has remained the same—80 quarters over 80 quarters. The total amount or quantity of surplus-value has risen from 60 quarters to 80 quarters, that is, by 20 quarters. The capital advanced has fallen from 120 to 100 quarters. Previously, 60 quarters were made on 120 quarters, or a rate of profit of 50 per cent. Now 80 quarters are made on 100 quarters, or a rate of profit of 80 per cent. The total value of the capital advanced has fallen from 120 quarters by 20 quarters and the rate of profit has risen from 50 per cent to 80 per cent. The profit itself, irrespective of its rate, now amounts to 80 quarters, whereas previously it was 60 quarters, that is, it has risen by 20 quarters, or as much as the amount (not the rate) of the surplus-value.” (p 214)
In other words, a Kilo of corn still has a value of 0.5 days labour. As the workers' wage consists only of corn, the “production costs of wages”, i.e. the value of labour-power remains the same as before. The total production remains the same at 180 kilos, and the rate of surplus value remains 100%. However, it appears that the mass of surplus value has risen from 60 kilos to 80 kilos, and the rate of profit has risen from 50% to 80%. This rise in the rate of profit is due to two factors. Firstly, the mass of surplus value has risen from 60 to 80 kilos, secondly, the capital advanced has fallen from 120 kilos (60 constant capital + 60 variable-capital) to 100 kilos (20 constant capital + 80 variable-capital) But, as Marx points out,
“...this whole variation in the rate of profit is only an illusion, only a transfer from one account book to another.” (p 215)
The capitalist has 80 kilos of profit rather than 60 kilos, but that is because he has taken over the operation of the capitalist who previously provided him with constant capital. That capitalist made 20 kilos of profit, on their own capital, and it is only this 20 kilos of profit that is now appropriated by the integrated capital. The 20 kilos of profit was previously included in the price of the means of production, sold to the final producer, and, thereby, also appeared as a part of their advanced capital, which is why their advanced capital has fallen from 120 kilos to 100 kilos. Whilst this is undoubtedly an advantage for this individual capitalist, from the standpoint of the total social capital, it is clear that nothing has actually changed.
Considered in terms of Marx's reproduction schemas, set out in Capital II, the situation was always as follows:
Department I
c 20 + v 20 + s 20 = 60
Department II
c 60 + v 60 + s 60
But, as Marx points out, in Capital II, in relation to these reproduction schemas, and Adam Smith's “absurd dogma” that the value of output resolves entirely into revenues, the 60 kilos of constant capital consumed by Department II, here, are paid back out of the final output to Department I. Out of the 60 kilos paid back to Department I, by Department II, only 40 kilos are consumed as revenue (20 wages + 20 profit), because the other 20 kilos must replace, in kind, the 20 kilos of constant capital consumed by Department I itself, without which it could not continue to produce. It is as though, therefore, out of Department I's output, of 60 kilos, 20 kilos were simply retained, and used to replace, in kind, its own constant capital.
“The rate of profit appears to be bigger, because previously capitalist I regarded the 60 quarters as constant capital only, which in fact they were for him; he therefore disregarded the profit accruing to the producer of constant capital. The rate of profit has not altered, any more than the surplus-value or any factor of production, including the productivity of labour. Previously, the capital laid out by the producer [of constant capital] amounted to 40 quarters (20 working-days); that [variable capital] laid out by capitalist I amounted to 60 quarters (30 working-days), making a total of 100 quarters (50 working-days), and the profit of the first capitalist came to 20 quarters, that of the other to 60, together 80 quarters (40 working-days). The whole product amounting to 90 working-days (180 quarters) yielded 80 quarters profit on 100 laid out in wages and constant capital. For society, the revenue deriving from the profit has remained the same as before, and so has the ratio of surplus-value to wages.” (p 215-6)
No comments:
Post a Comment