Talk:Organic composition of capital

Untitled 1
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)

Untitled 2
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)

Untitled 3
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)

Untitled 4
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)

Untitled 5
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)

Beware of Bob Rayner's "editing"
The scam editor Bob Rayner User:Bobrayner specializes in cutting large bits out of articles that he doesn't like, for no reason at all or for some spurious reason. He doesn't understand anything about the subjectmatter. The article then has to be reset to what is was before his vandalism. This article is still being worked on from time to time and Rayner's destructive habits are unwanted here. Jurriaan (talk) 19:23, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

Organic - live vs. dead?
If the "organic" composition of capital refers to how some of it is made up of "living" labor, why is the amount of living labor inversely proportional to the "organic" composition of capital as a whole? Is that really what it refers to, or is it just how, in Marx's opinion, capital has an "organic" tendency to become less..."organic"? Esszet (talk) 00:30, 3 January 2020 (UTC)