Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by WildBot (talk | contribs) at 07:54, 13 April 2010 (Found broken #section links to Labor_theory_of_value#The_transformation_problem, labor theory of value#an_alternative_view). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Tip: #section links are case-sensitive on most browsers Links from this article with broken #section links : ], ] You can remove this template after fixing the problems | FAQ | Report a problem

Philosophy: Contemporary Start‑class

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Misplaced Pages.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy Start This article has been rated as Start-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. Associated task forces: /  Contemporary philosophy

Jim, how would it be if you removed your qualification on c:v from the introductory paragraph, and subsequently spelled-out what alternative accounts of organic composition exist in the Marxian literature? Otherwise this seems to me to muddy the waters too much. Adhib 08:55, 28 Sep 2004 (UTC)

If I have the time, I'll do it. Jim 15:42, Sep 28, 2004 (UTC)

I'm also a bit puzzled by the removal of my link to Grossmann. The 'four variables' no longer makes much sense. What was the reasoning behind removing it? What should I be looking out for if I want to reinstate it? Adhib 17:06, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)

What has this autonomist stuff have to do with a basic definition of Marx's concept? (JB)

The Processed World group heavily argued capital composition in relation to white collar and service labours.Fifelfoo 03:26, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Isn't there an error in this paragraph:

Marx argues that a rising organic composition of capital is a necessary effect of capital accumulation and competition in the sphere of production, at least in the long term. This means that the share of constant capital in the total capital outlay increases, and that labor input per product unit declines. Ultimately, a rising OCC must depress the rate of profit.

Surely a higher organic composition of capital means more labour, less capital. Should it not be falling? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.195.14.1 (talk) 13:29, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Actually, David Harvey comments in "Limits to Capital" (1982) that the cause of the change in the ratio of constant capital to variable capital is technology; therefore, as the constant capital increases through technological change the variable capital embodied in labor does in fact decrease. I think. J. Smith —Preceding unsigned comment added by 157.182.210.73 (talk) 22:38, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

• Start-Class Philosophy articles
• Unknown-importance Philosophy articles
• Start-Class Contemporary philosophy articles
• Unknown-importance Contemporary philosophy articles
• Contemporary philosophy task force articles