Admittedly a Marxist theoretician like Prof. Moseley has nuanced his FROP
theory somewhat now:

 

"I used to think that the falling rate of profit and a realization problem
were mutually exclusive causes of crises (and I have taught this to a
generation of students). And I still think that is true for any given
period. But I have come to realize, as a result of recent decades in the US
economy, that in a dynamic, long-run sense, a falling rate of profit may
evolve into a realization problem, in circumstances such as the recent
decades in the US economy, in which government policies have attempted to
avoid a depression and bankruptcies."

http://www.peri.umass.edu/fileadmin/pdf/working_papers/working_papers_301-35
0/7.4Moseley.pdf

 

If you think I am "trolling" about the Marxist obsession with the falling
rate of industry profit, please consult the contemporary Marxist literature
for yourself. Quite simply, most Marxists believe it is super-revolutionary
and super-radical to attribute the economic crisis to the FROP.

 

It is just that it is a bit difficult to sustain the theory of the falling
rate of profit, when average corporate profitability - as business people
now acknowledge themselves - is high.

 

What you need to explain - as business people themelves  now acknowledge -
is why the real investment on which economic growth depends is low, even
although profitability is high. For that explanation I think you need some
kind of financial theory similar to Toporowski's. It is not something that
Marx ever dealt with in any detail, since he obviously could not deal with
the financial architecture of business operations in 2013.

 

J.

 

_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

Reply via email to