> In the non-short run, fixed capital isn't even fixed............it's as > malleable as wax, just like the institutions that make 'it' what 'it' is.
For accounting purposes, fixed capital is normally defined as tangible durable assets held for one year or more. For Marx, the distinction between circulating and fixed capital is purely relative however, and it relates exclusively to the turnover time of productive constant capital. Fixed capital comprises assets held and used for several production periods (during several turnovers of circulating capital). This is discussed in chapter 8 of Marx's book Capital Volume 2. Other things being equal, the faster the turnover of capital, the larger the rate of profit is, because for each unit of profit there is a smaller unit of capital invested. However, in the history of capitalist development contradictory process are involved. The rising organic composition of capital means that an increasing portion of the total capital outlay consists of fixed assets (around 70-80% on average). But the obsolescence of fixed capital (what Marx calls "moral depreciation""as distinct from physical depreciation) also occurs more quickly. This means in some cases, that when a large plant is built, it is technically obsolescent by the time its construction is completed, because of technological changes and cheaper production methods of fixed equipment. This topic is covered in more detail by Ernest Mandel in the chapter "Acceleration of the turnover time of capital" in his book Late Capitalism. However, as a historical generalisation, the acceleration of the turnover of circulating constant capital is faster than the acceleration of fixed capital. More efficient means of communication and data transmission facilitate in the increase in the turnover of capital. J.
