Surplus Profits and Progressive Land Ownership: A Marxist Perspective

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Firstly I outline Shan Turnbull’s idea of businessmen earning ‘surplus profits’ on their investments, like a shopping centre, and how potentially the use of progressive forms of land ownership may eliminate, or capture, these ‘surplus profits’ to the advantage of the local community.  Next I explain Marx’s view of how profit is produced and distributed in our capitalist economy.  This allows us to see how Turnbull’s ‘surplus profits’ are no better or worse ethically than profit in general under capitalism.  I then focus on how Marx imagines the value of fixed capital is determined and how it can, or crucially cannot, return to the capitalist in money, a non-fixed form of value.  Finally I return to the question of the potential usefulness of alternative progressive forms of land ownership to local communities, now guided by Marx’s framework of how value and profit are produced and distributed in our capitalist society.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)233-252
Number of pages2
JournalCritique
Volume44
Issue number3, Summer
Publication statusPublished - 28 Jul 2016

Fingerprint

Land Ownership
Surplus
Profit
Local Communities
Capitalism
Economy
Karl Marx
Businessmen
Shopping
Usefulness

Cite this

@article{b892baf6027d4319b02bbc6f84984e78,
title = "Surplus Profits and Progressive Land Ownership: A Marxist Perspective",
abstract = "Firstly I outline Shan Turnbull’s idea of businessmen earning ‘surplus profits’ on their investments, like a shopping centre, and how potentially the use of progressive forms of land ownership may eliminate, or capture, these ‘surplus profits’ to the advantage of the local community.  Next I explain Marx’s view of how profit is produced and distributed in our capitalist economy.  This allows us to see how Turnbull’s ‘surplus profits’ are no better or worse ethically than profit in general under capitalism.  I then focus on how Marx imagines the value of fixed capital is determined and how it can, or crucially cannot, return to the capitalist in money, a non-fixed form of value.  Finally I return to the question of the potential usefulness of alternative progressive forms of land ownership to local communities, now guided by Marx’s framework of how value and profit are produced and distributed in our capitalist society.",
author = "Nicholas Potts",
year = "2016",
month = "7",
day = "28",
language = "English",
volume = "44",
pages = "233--252",
journal = "Critique",
issn = "0301-7605",
publisher = "Critique",
number = "3, Summer",

}

Surplus Profits and Progressive Land Ownership : A Marxist Perspective. / Potts, Nicholas.

In: Critique, Vol. 44, No. 3, Summer, 28.07.2016, p. 233-252.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Surplus Profits and Progressive Land Ownership

T2 - A Marxist Perspective

AU - Potts, Nicholas

PY - 2016/7/28

Y1 - 2016/7/28

N2 - Firstly I outline Shan Turnbull’s idea of businessmen earning ‘surplus profits’ on their investments, like a shopping centre, and how potentially the use of progressive forms of land ownership may eliminate, or capture, these ‘surplus profits’ to the advantage of the local community.  Next I explain Marx’s view of how profit is produced and distributed in our capitalist economy.  This allows us to see how Turnbull’s ‘surplus profits’ are no better or worse ethically than profit in general under capitalism.  I then focus on how Marx imagines the value of fixed capital is determined and how it can, or crucially cannot, return to the capitalist in money, a non-fixed form of value.  Finally I return to the question of the potential usefulness of alternative progressive forms of land ownership to local communities, now guided by Marx’s framework of how value and profit are produced and distributed in our capitalist society.

AB - Firstly I outline Shan Turnbull’s idea of businessmen earning ‘surplus profits’ on their investments, like a shopping centre, and how potentially the use of progressive forms of land ownership may eliminate, or capture, these ‘surplus profits’ to the advantage of the local community.  Next I explain Marx’s view of how profit is produced and distributed in our capitalist economy.  This allows us to see how Turnbull’s ‘surplus profits’ are no better or worse ethically than profit in general under capitalism.  I then focus on how Marx imagines the value of fixed capital is determined and how it can, or crucially cannot, return to the capitalist in money, a non-fixed form of value.  Finally I return to the question of the potential usefulness of alternative progressive forms of land ownership to local communities, now guided by Marx’s framework of how value and profit are produced and distributed in our capitalist society.

UR - https://doi.org/10.1080/03017605.2016.1199630

M3 - Article

VL - 44

SP - 233

EP - 252

JO - Critique

JF - Critique

SN - 0301-7605

IS - 3, Summer

ER -