This question <646|646> overall <643|646> Tim: <643|72>.  
  Question 704: Is it correct to argue that constant capital is also a source of surplus-value because the capitalists are able to exploit their laborers only because they have control over the means of production?   
  [645] Tim: Incorrect.   Constant capital is one of two forms of capital that are invested into production, which to me would seem like a sunk cost. I don't think it's correct to say that constant capital is a source of surplus-value, but rather I would say that it plays an integral role in accumulating the surplus-value. Without the constant and variable capital costs you wouldn't have anything to produce with and no one to produce. Essentially, surplus-value is the residual that the capitalists have exploited out of the proletariat, money in their pockets, and constant/variable capital is the investment into the means of production, sunk costs.   
 
 
 
  Students enrolled for Econ 5080 in 2009fa are invited to give feedback to the above message
Pseudonym:      UofU ID:  
Text: