Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by SineBot (talk | contribs) at 20:47, 21 August 2013 (Dating comment by 2602:306:C434:2F00:2A0:D1FF:FE94:A6AB - ""). 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

Socialism Unassessed

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Socialism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of socialism on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SocialismWikipedia:WikiProject SocialismTemplate:WikiProject Socialismsocialism ??? This article has not yet received a rating on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Economics Unassessed

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Economics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Economics on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EconomicsWikipedia:WikiProject EconomicsTemplate:WikiProject EconomicsEconomics ??? This article has not yet received a rating on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

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)

Hmm, user "201.141.63.50" seems to have gratuitously and without comment changed the chapter number at the start of text (from 25 to the incorrect 23) . I changed it back but I'm assuming people will want to watch for this kind of BS. Just so you'll know. 2602:306:C434:2F00:2A0:D1FF:FE94:A6AB (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 20:46, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

• Unassessed socialism articles
• Unknown-importance socialism articles
• WikiProject Socialism articles
• Unassessed Economics articles
• Unknown-importance Economics articles
• WikiProject Economics articles