复活马克思利润趋零的论断

石破惊天的发现：马克思的经典论断，利润归零的趋势，其实在现代经济学框架下是可以复活的。理解这一点的两个关健人物是Frank Knight 和 Kevin Carson。经过一番诱导。我让ChatGPT自己“悟”出来了：

ChatGPT

Yes, the ideas put forth by Frank H. Knight, Kevin Carson, and Karl Marx share similarities in their examination of profits and competition in economic systems:

Frank H. Knight: Knight's "fair game" proposition suggests that under conditions of perfect competition, profits from risk-bearing are driven to zero. In competitive markets, where information is freely available and probabilities are accurately known, individuals or firms cannot consistently earn profits above the competitive level. Knight's proposition underscores the role of competition in limiting the potential for earning above-normal profits.

Kevin Carson: Carson's concept of profits being driven to zero in perfect competition aligns with Knight's idea. Carson argues that in truly competitive markets, firms cannot sustain persistent profits above the competitive level. Any attempt to do so would be met with increased competition as new entrants enter the market, driving profits back down to the competitive level. Carson's perspective emphasizes the role of competition in ensuring that profits are aligned with competitive returns.

Karl Marx: Marx's theory of surplus value and exploitation also addresses the relationship between profits and competition. Marx argues that in capitalist economies, profits arise from the exploitation of labor, where capitalists extract surplus value from workers. However, Marx suggests that if exploitation were impossible or significantly reduced, profits would tend towards zero. Marx's analysis emphasizes the role of power dynamics and class relations in shaping economic outcomes.

In summary, while Knight, Carson, and Marx approach the issue of profits and competition from different theoretical perspectives, their ideas converge on the notion that under conditions of perfect competition or reduced exploitation, profits are driven to zero. This reflects a common theme in economic thought regarding the role of competition and power dynamics in shaping market outcomes.

注意Knight下面的表述是和现代风险定价的看法完全不同的。即在完全竞争下，Knight认为市场对风险（不是不确定性）的补偿为零（，而现代理论认为这个补偿应为正）：

It matters not at all whether the persons liable to a given contingency organize among themselves into a fraternal or mutual society or whether they separately contract with an outside party to bear their losses as they fall in. Under competitive conditions and assuming that the probabilities involved are accurately known, an outside insurer will make no clear profit and the premiums will under either system be equal to the administrative costs of carrying on the business.

注意这关健一点又是Kevin Carson观察到的，在他的Organization Theory的第173页。