(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); Marxian economics: Differentiating the "Rate of Profit Equation"

While watching a recent Youtube video on Marxian crisis theory and the Tendency Of The Rate Of Profit To Fall, I decided to apply calculus to the equations to see what I got.

The rate of profit is defined as ∏ = S / (C + V)

where ∏ = rate of profit, S = total surplus value appropriated by the capitalist employer, C = total capital expenditure and V = total labor expenditure (wages and payrolls).

For those not familiar with Marxian economic theory, the argument is that as production becomes more "capital intensive" (machines taking the place of workers), then it causes the rate of profit to fall over time. Capital intensity is also called the "Organic composition of capital"

Organic composition of capital:

O = C/V

Algebraic mutations:

C = OV

V = C/O

Substituting to express ∏ in terms of O:

∏= S / (OV + C/O)

Now we must take the partial derivative of ∏ with respect to O. I used an online derivative calculator and got:

∂∏/∂O = = -S(V – C/O^2) / (OV + C/O)^2

Next we can substitute the variable O back out of the formula:

∂∏/∂(C/V) = -S[V - C/(C^2/V^2)] / [ V(C/V) + C/(C/V)]^2

And simplify down to:

∂∏/∂(C/V) = -S(V – V^2/C) / (C + V)^2

A few things can be said about this derivative formula:

1. It is a rational function with the numerator –S(V-V^2/C) and the denominator (C + V)^2.

2. The sign of the derivative is key: if it’s positive, than a higher organic composition of capital (i.e. more capital-intensive production) leads to a higher profit rate. But if it’s negative, then a higher organic composition leads to a lower profit rate.

3. Since the denominator is a perfect square regardless of the value of C and V, we can conclude it will always be positive. Hence, the sign of the derivative depends entirely on the sign of the numerator –S(V - V^2/C).

4. The numerator is a product of the quantities –S and (V – V^2/C). Since we can safely assume that S is almost always positive (unless most companies across the economy are running red ink!), then –S will almost always be a negative value.

5. This leaves the quantity (V – V^2/C). Its sign must therefore determine the sign of the profit-rate derivative. If it is positive, the derivative is negative. If it is negative, though, it cancels out the negativity of –S and the derivative is positive. We know that V is positive, so the quantity must therefore be positive if V > V^2/C.

6. Since the falling rate of profit is contingent upon a negative derivative, which is in turn contingent on the positivity of (V – V^2/C), a falling rate of profit must also be contingent upon the inequality V > V^2/C.

7. Divide both sides by V:

1 > V/C

8. Convert back to O:

1 > 1/O

9. Multiply both sides by O:

O > 1.

10. So we can finally conclude that a falling rate of profit is contingent on O > 1, which essentially means that C > V. So the capitalist production becomes more relatively profitable up to the point where C = V, then becomes less relatively profitable once C > V.

=============

Again, this all depends on whether the online differentiator (derivative-calculator.net) actually gave me the correct partial derivative with respect to O, and whether my steps involving O = C/V substitution are actually mathematically kosher.

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**

Dismiss Notice

Join Physics Forums Today!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# Marxian economics: Differentiating the Rate of Profit Equation

Loading...

Similar Threads - Marxian economics Differentiating | Date |
---|---|

B Product rule OR Partial differentiation | Jan 10, 2018 |

A Differential operator, inverse thereof | Jan 9, 2018 |

MVDT Proof in economics | Mar 14, 2012 |

Starting Postgraduate Programme in Economics, Advice for Calculus - Real Analysis | Jul 30, 2011 |

Applications in Economics | Nov 6, 2003 |

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**