Labor theory of value debate

Louis N Proyect lnp3 at columbia.edu
Thu Sep 29 07:50:35 MDT 1994


Dear Steve Keen,

US corporations in Europe between 1950 and 1965 invested $8.1 billion and
made $5.5 in profits, in Latin America they invested $3.8 billion and
made $11.3 billion in profits, and in Africa they invested $5.2 billion
and made $14.3 billion in profits.

American corporations depend on third world countries for 100% of their
diamonds, coffee, platinum, mercury, natural rubber and cobalt. They get
98% of their manganese from these countries, 90% of their chrome and
aluminum. 20 to 40% of certain critical imports (platinum, mercury,
cobalt, chrome, manganese) come from Africa.

Doesn't it appear that US corporations rely on the third world for
sources of super-profit? Isn't it clear that resistance to
superexploitation is a major cause of violence in the third world? The
placid, welfare-state model that you propose as a model is not in the realm
of possibilites for Brazil, Nigeria, Indonesia, etc. If your economic
theories are relevant, they must be relevant to the whole planet.

Louis Proyect

On Thu, 29 Sep 1994 Steve.Keen at unsw.edu.au wrote:

> My comment was that the above wasn't "necessary" for American,
> European and Japanese corporations to achieve profits in the first
> instance--what I said was debatable was whether these profits would
> be higher or lower because of them. Exploitation of resources from
> the TW means lower cost inputs; but it also means no possibility
> of realising surplus by selling to them. So exploitation cuts both
> ways.
> Cheers,
> Steve Keen
>


     ------------------



More information about the Marxism mailing list