> But even I have to admit that the current hegemony of neoliberalism in a
> context of declining U.S. hegemony and global crisis is a rather
> interesting phenomenon. Go figure.
> chris
The missing ingredient, Chris, is that surplus-value is not extracted
solely through coercion, but also through the working of financial markets
(see my paper, "A Credit-Market Theory of Surplus-Value"). I can't post
the paper, since it is under revision at a journal, but the main argument
is that if U.S. Company A can borrow capital to finance its operations at
7% real interest, while peripheral Company B can borrow capital at 15% and
peripheral Market-woman C at 100% or more, then liberalized trade and,
more critically, liberalized exchange rates, favor Company A.
That is to say, even on an otherwise truly level playing field, the core
capitalist can extract surplus-value from the periphery. To make it
concrete, consider a mine in Peripheral Country that is up for sale.
Let's say that net operating profits from the mine are $10 million
annually. Peripheral Company B can pay no more than $66.7 million for the
mine, since it's capital costs would then equal its operating profits,
leaving zero economic profit. Core Company A can buy the mine for
$100 million, out-bidding the peripheral company by 50%, and still turn a
nice economic profit, since it's capital cost for $100 million is only
$7 million per year, leaving an economic profit of $3 million.
This is the basic reasoning behind my dissertation, "Economic Development
in the Liberal State," being supervised by - Christopher K. Chase-Dunn.
By the way - I'd like the list to know that Chris has been a fantastic
advisor, and very supportive of my work, even though I constantly
contradict him in public. What a guy!
Also - I AM on the job market this year, if anyone is interested. :)
Salvatore