This paper argues the conjecture that worker cooperatives (WCs) are rare because of competitive disadvantages relative to conventionally-owned firms (CFs) is not supported by existing research. It surveys research on the survival and failure of WCs and CFs and estimates the nonparametric hazard and survival functions for CFs in the US. Because the rarity of WCs cannot be attributed to performance it must result from a low formation rate. This is traced to wealth and credit constraints, entrepreneurial rents, and collective action problems, but since the conversion of existing firms to WCs can overcome these factors this explanation remains incomplete.

This paper integrates unproductive activity into a Marxist growth model based on Marx's reproduction schemes. Labor extraction and technological change are related to the production and distribution of surplus and thus are endogenous. Unproductive labor is shown to have potentially contradictory effects. It can squeeze profits and reduce growth or increase work intensity and develop productivity enhancing technological change, which increase profitability and growth. Empirical evidence indicates that both effects occurred in the postwar United States. Marx's reproduction schemes are also shown to rely on a classical growth dynamic in which the profit and savings rates determine the rate of growth.The traditional Marxist theories of short-period cyclical and long-period secular dynamics can be grouped into three basic types: theories based on a tendency of the rate of profit to fall, underconsumptionist theories, and profit squeeze theories. While each provides insight into the dynamics of a capitalist economy, none of them, as currently understood, are very useful when trying to understand the consequences of the growth in unproductive labor in the United States over the last century. Studies of the U.S. economy consistently find increasing levels of unproductive employment, and there is evidence that this is true for other developed capitalist countries as well. But this issue has yet to be integrated into Marxist theories of capitalist dynamics and has received little formal treatment. The relative lack of theoretical work on this issue makes it difficult to consider its causes or consequences and limits the explanatory power of Marxian theory for contemporary issues. With that in mind the purpose of this paper is to develop a Marxist

This paper derives the Marxian social accounting aggregates, including surplus value, using a social accounting matrix. The derivation assumes a three sector economy and consists of a set of discrete operations applied to conventional national aggregates. It demonstrates that the Marxian aggregates are fully consistent at the economy-wide level, and that the mapping from conventional to Marxian aggregates is well-defined. This mapping relies on Marxian class theory, and it is this class theory that distinguishes the Marxian aggregates from the conventional and Sraffian alternatives. It is shown that the Marxian surplus has no necessary relation to the conventional measures of either net operating surplus or net product, and hence that neither of these serve as useful proxies for the Marxian aggregates.

This paper examines the effect of class conflict on industrial location both theoretically and empirically. It demonstrates that there is a sound theoretical basis and empirical support for the conclusion that U.S. industries have chosen to abandon agglomeration and scale economies in order to secure a distribution of income that favors capital at the expense of labor. The decline of the U.S. manufacturing belt is examined with reference to union density, bargaining power, and the effects that large-scale production plants have on these factors. The meat packing industry in the postwar United States serves as a case study to establish the specific ways that class conflict has shaped the scale profile and geographic distribution of production plants. The paper builds upon the class conflict approach to urban and regional economics pioneered by Matthew Edel and David Gordon and aims to demonstrate its explanatory power. JEL classification: R30, J51, B51.

No abstract