My third and final radio show commentary on Marx’s economics vs. contemporary Marxist (and mainstream) economists’ distortion of his views. Discussion focuses on the two historic distortions: the falling rate of profit thesis (contemporary Marxist economists) and the transformation problem thesis (mainstream).
TO LISTEN GO TO:
SHOW ANNOUNCEMENT
In this final 3rd show discussion the differences between what Marx said and what economists today erroneously say he said, Dr. Rasmus addresses two historic issues in Marx’s analysis of capitalism. First is the idea, held by many contemporary economists who consider themselves Marxists, that under capitalism the rate of profit tends to decline over time, leading to ‘crises’ in the form of severe business cycle contractions (recessions, depressions, etc.). Rasmus shows this is incorrect, that Marx’s ‘Falling Rate of Profit’ tendency is a ‘in the long run’ supply side argument about the breakdown of capitalism and not an explanation of short run business cycle ‘crises’ like economic depressions. Rasmus debunks the assumptions in the Falling Rate of Profit tendency argument and explains how 21st century capitalist instability cannot be explained by a singular focus on profits. The second issue addressed is by contemporary mainstream economics critics of Marx, who hold that Marx failed to explain how values get transformed into prices in the real world and therefore Marx’s explanation of how exploitation of labor drives capitalist profits is never proven and thus Marx’s entire body of analysis should be rejected. Again, a single variable (price) is basis for rejection of everything else Marx said, just as a single variable (profit) explains everything he said. Rasmus concludes with commentary why both contemporary Marxists and Mainstreamers fail to understand the financialization of capitalism today as a key source of crises, short run and long.
Dr. Jack Rasmus @drjackrasmus
Jack Rasmus 
Leave a Reply