I have a grad presentation this Thursday on the labour theory of value and its consequences (IE if its true what are the outcomes.) One of these is of course the falling rate of profit (which I also don't understand well.) But what else?
Basically I need some reliable sources that aren't too lengthy if possible which explain the LTV easily and I need someone to point me in the right direction. Where do I start with the LTV? If the LTV is true or not true what does this mean?
Other urls found in this thread:
sites.google.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
marxists.org
therealmovement.wordpress.com
twitter.com
watch cockshott
like a non-meme source. It's a grad course in political economy.
read cockshott, then
fuck you, idiot
...
Mendel's is a quick read. If you have some more time Shaikh is great but quite harder to read.
And before turning your nose with Cockshott, give a chance to its main stuff.
wot
He's one of the greatest leftist academics alive
Read Capital vol.1 chapter 1.
It's more comprehensive and yet explains the basic ideas more than any derivative source.
Also, sage for you calling cockshott a fucking meme.
...
actually read the whole thing
also what kind of fucking "grad student" starts his presentation projects a week before it's due?
If you're a graduate student and having a presentation on a topic you have no knowledge about, I have no idea what the fuck you think you're doing.
to be fair, it is totally permissible in Western academia to just make shit up about Marxism and socialist history, so he'll probably be alright.
its just an intro presentation to show what my research topic is, the actual project is due at the end of the summer
Do you know what organic composition of capital means in Marxonese, OP? Imagine you are the porky. It means the amount of dead labor (labor stored up in the things that your workers work with when producing stuff) relative to the living labor (freshly applied labor done by your workers). The term rise in organic composition of capital means you have a rising amount of dead relative to living. The assumption by Marx was that there is a tendency for the organic composition of labor to rise. You want to produce cheaper, so you get the tech that makes that possible. Marx also assumed that profits come from fresh human work only, even though that surely isn't true for each individual business (e. g. if you only own a natural resource and rent it out or sell it without applying any labor to it, you can still get money for that), the assumption is about profit in the aggregate that is then redistributed in some complicated way.
So, Marx got two assumptions: 1. Total profits come only from the fresh-labor part of investments. 2. Fresh labor relative to embodied labor is going down. If these two assumptions are true, you have the tendency for the rate of profit to fall. If you think of wealth as useful things and the wealth of a population as the amount of stuff per person, surely then a moderate shrinking of the population shouldn't be bad. But if you are a porky who likes profit and who also happens to believe in the Marxist model, a shrinking population should worry you a lot.
Maybe Rubin could help you a little bit:
marxists.org
Measures of profit rates for some countries
i don't understand why for 1900 it was 1990 (for profit rate to reach zero), but now it's 2056 and in 2056 it also won't be 0?
I was going to say you are so fucked, but ok
This might give you something to work with, some of the other links as well
The RoP tends to go down, it's not a necessity or a constant trend
Doesn't the data show that the rate of profit will become infinitesimal, in that case?
That wasn't even a meme you retard. His youtube channel literally videos on the very things you're going to cover.
literally has videos*