Quote:
Yet, there is a point within this process which allows the entire development to make a leap. And it is when the whole of capitalist production comes to produce a general rate of profit and, consequently, an average profit. The fundamental idea of the average profit is based on the principle that "the capital in each sphere of production must share pro rata to its magnitude in the total surplus-value squeezed out of the labourers by the total social capital; or, that every individual capital should be regarded merely as a part of the total social capital, and every capitalist as a shareholder in the total social enterprise."'7 At this point, the profit that the individual capitalist takes in, is different from the surplus-value that he extracts. At this point profit and surplus-value are actually different magnitudes. Only exceptionally or accidentally does the surplus-value actually produced within a particular sphere of production coincides with the profit contained in the sales price of the commodity
I'm not sure what he's saying, that to calculate an the amount of surpus value an individual capitalist aquires you take his "share" by investment of the total surplus value in the whole social enterprise, or an individuals capitalist's ptofit is the share of the total social enetrprise's profit by inverstement. Or something else entirely?
Can comment on articles and discussions
I think its that surplus value is averaged to calculate the profit of an individual capirtalist. So profit is an average across social enetepise on amount invetsed. A difficult read. Can anyone tell what the autonoist theory of value (in that it is not abstracted from class struggle) is - just that class struggle sets price (is this not usually held then?)?