The rate of profit

[ComradeRed]

So, I have finally gotten to chapter 13 of volume III of Das Kapital. Marx explains the rate of profit is s/(c+v), or s/C since c+v=C. For those who have no clue what I am talking about, s=surplus vale, c=constant capital, v=variable capital.

But isn't constant capital at least one commodity? And as Marx explains in the first chapter of volume III, the price of a commodity=s+c+v. Why isn't the rate of profit then s/(v+c') where c'=s+v+c" and c"=s+v+c"', etc., so the rate of profit would be surplus value divided by wages plus cost of production?

Or am I taking this too analytically and this is what Marx is actually saying? :huh:

[NovelGentry]

it IS that way, so to speak. The equation itself is recursive by using the c again, but each c has a different set of c's that were used to produce it. I think all you've done is gone to make that a point to show it, I think Marx pretty much assumed it was known, or maybe I'm misunderstanding what you're meaning by c', c", anc c"' and so on.

EDIT: Oh... btw, wages are part of the cost of production, if I'm not mistaken. I haven't read capital at all, so I'm not aware of the context he's given. But from what few excerpts I've read I thought the idea that the variable capital WAS wages... or at least the work force as a productive force.

Thus v would be equivalent to the exchange value given to all workers to produce the product for sale, while c would be the cost of the commodiies (collectively) used in it's production.

[percept¡on]

Originally posted by [email protected] 23 2005, 04:37 AM
So, I have finally gotten to chapter 13 of volume III of Das Kapital. Marx explains the rate of profit is s/(c+v), or s/C since c+v=C. For those who have no clue what I am talking about, s=surplus vale, c=constant capital, v=variable capital.

But isn't constant capital at least one commodity? And as Marx explains in the first chapter of volume III, the price of a commodity=s+c+v. Why isn't the rate of profit then s/(v+c') where c'=s+v+c" and c"=s+v+c"', etc., so the rate of profit would be surplus value divided by wages plus cost of production?

Or am I taking this too analytically and this is what Marx is actually saying? :huh:
I think you're overanalyzing here. In economics, you want to keep it as simple as possible. The rate of surplus would be s/(v+c). The cost of a commodity would be s+v+c. IF you want to write it out it would technically be s+v+{s+v+[s+v+(s+v+c)]} or something like that, but the term 'fixed capital cost' implies that the value of all inputs into this unit of capital are included.

[ComradeRed]

Originally posted by NovelGentry
Oh... btw, wages are part of the cost of production, if I'm not mistaken. No, wages are variable capital. Constant capital is the means of production. Sorry for being unclear :(



I think you're overanalyzing here. In retrospect, yes I was overanalyzing. I have re-read Capital carefully, and have come to the conclusion that the price of c acts as a commodity itself. It is, however, irrelevant as to the amount of surplus value, et al., which constitutes it. I mean, one should only be concerned with the final outcome of it as c, and not with the factors that make it thus due to it being irrelevant. (I hope that made sense :lol:)