thebase.works · Das Kapital II Kap. 7 · semantic zoom
Z3
Kap. 7
Umschlagszeit und Umschlagszahl
Chapters 1 to 6 followed capital through one circuit and asked what the circuit costs. This chapter asks what happens when the circuit REPEATS, and that question is what the rest of Part Two answers. Read the first sentence carefully: it is the one place in the chapter where the German uses one root for both the whole span and the market stretch inside it, and the English on screen inherits the collision.
Man hat gesehn: Die gesamte Zirkulationszeit eines gegebnen Kapitals ist gleich der Summe seiner Umlaufszeit und seiner Produktionszeit. Es ist der Zeitabschnitt von dem Augenblick des Vorschusses des Kapitalwerts in einer bestimmten Form bis zur Rückkehr des prozessierenden Kapitalwerts in derselben Form.
turnover time defined

We've already seen this: the total time it takes a given capital to go all the way round — its turnover time — is made up of two parts added together: the time it spends circulating and the time it spends in production. This is the whole stretch from the moment a sum of capital-value is advanced in some particular form, until that same value, having gone through the whole process, comes back in that same form again.

Der bestimmende Zweck der kapitalistischen Produktion ist stets Verwertung des vorgeschoßnen Werts, ob dieser Wert nun in seiner selbständigen Form, d.h. in der Geldform vorgeschossen sei, oder in Ware, so daß seine Wertform im Preis der vorgeschoßnen Waren nur ideelle Selbständigkeit besitzt. In beiden Fällen durchläuft dieser Kapitalwert während seines Kreislaufs verschiedne Existenzformen. Seine Identität mit sich selbst wird konstatiert in den Büchern des Kapitalisten oder in der Form des Rechengelds.
the driving purpose: valorization

The determining purpose of capitalist production is always the valorization of the advanced value — a matter of the form itself, not of anyone's motives. That value may be advanced in its own independent form, as money, or as a commodity, where its value-form has only an ideal independence, showing up as a price. Either way, this capital-value passes through a series of different forms as it goes round its circuit. That it remains the same value throughout — its sameness with itself — is confirmed in the capitalist's account books, or in money of account.

Ob wir die Form G ... G´ nehmen oder die Form P ... P, beide Formen schließen ein, 1. daß der vorgeschoßne Wert als Kapitalwert fungiert und sich verwertet hat; 2. daß er zu der Form, worin er seinen Prozeß begann, nach Beschreibung desselben zurückgekehrt ist. Die Verwertung des vorgeschoßnen Werts G und zugleich die Rückkehr des Kapitals zu dieser Form (der Geldform) ist handgreiflich sichtbar in G ... G´. Aber dasselbe findet in der zweiten Form statt. Denn der Ausgangspunkt von P ist das Vorhandensein der Produktionselemente, Waren von gegebnem Wert. Die Form schließt die Verwertung dieses Werts ein (W´ und G´) und die Rückkehr zu der ursprünglichen Form, denn im zweiten P besitzt der vorgeschoßne Wert wieder die Form der Produktionselemente, worin er ursprünglich vorgeschossen war.
both circuits: valorized, then returned

Take either form — money going out and coming back as more money, or production-elements going out and coming back as production-elements — and both include two things: first, that the advanced value functioned as capital and expanded itself; second, that after completing its course it returned to the form it started in. In the money circuit, both of these are plain to see: the expansion of the advanced value and the capital's return to its starting form, the form of money. But the same thing happens in the production circuit. It starts from the presence of the elements of production — commodities of a given value — and it too includes the expansion of that value (showing up as more commodities, more money) and a return to the original form, since by the time the elements of production reappear at the end, the advanced value is once again in the shape of elements of production.

Man hat früher gesehn: "Hat die Produktion kapitalistische Form, so die Reproduktion. Wie in der kapitalistischen Produktionsweise der Arbeitsprozeß nur als ein Mittel für den Verwertungsprozeß erscheint, so die Reproduktion nur als ein Mittel, den vorgeschoßnen Wert als Kapital zu reproduzieren, d.h. als sich verwertenden Wert." (Buch I, Kap. XXI, S. 588. <Siehe Band 23, S. 591>)
recalled: reproduction as reproducing capital

As was shown earlier: if production takes the capitalist form, so does reproduction. As Volume I put it: 'Just as, under capitalist production, the labour process appears only as a means to the process of expanding value, so reproduction appears only as a means of reproducing the advanced value as capital — that is, as value that expands itself' (Buch I, Kap. XXI, S. 588).

Die drei Formen I) G ... G´, II) P ... P und III) W´... W´ unterscheiden sich dadurch: In Form II (P ... P) ist die Wiedererneurung des Prozesses, der Reproduktionsprozeß, als wirklich, in Form I aber nur der Möglichkeit nach ausgedrückt. Aber beide unterscheiden sich dadurch von Form III, daß der vorgeschoßne Kapitalwert - sei es als Geld, sei es in der Gestalt der stofflichen Produktionselemente - den Ausgangspunkt bildet und daher auch den Punkt der Rückkehr. In G ... G´ ist die Rückkehr G´ = G + g. Wird der Prozeß auf derselben Stufenleiter erneuert, so bildet G wieder den Ausgangspunkt und g geht nicht in ihn ein, sondern zeigt uns nur, daß G sich als Kapital verwertet und daher einen Mehrwert g erzeugt, aber von sich abgestoßen hat. In der Form P ... P bildet der in der Form der Produktionselemente P vorgeschoßne Kapitalwert ebenfalls den Ausgangspunkt Die Form schließt seine Verwertung ein. Findet einfache Reproduktion statt, so fängt derselbe Kapitalwert, in derselben Form P, seinen Prozeß von neuem an. Findet Akkumulation statt, so eröffnet P´ (der Wertgröße nach W´) jetzt als vergrößerter Kapitalwert den Prozeß. Aber er beginnt wieder mit dem vorgeschoßnen Kapitalwert in der anfänglichen Form, wenn auch mit größrem Kapitalwert als vorher. Dagegen in Form III beginnt der Kapitalwert nicht als vorgeschoßner den Prozeß, sondern als bereits verwerteter, als der gesamte in der Form von Waren befindliche Reichtum, wovon der vorgeschoßne Kapitalwert nur ein Teil. Die letztre Form ist wichtig für den dritten Abschnitt, wo die Bewegung der Einzelkapitale im Zusammenhang mit der Bewegung des gesellschaftlichen Gesamtkapitals aufgefaßt wird. Sie ist dagegen nicht zu benutzen für den Umschlag des Kapitals, der stets beginnt mit dem Vorschuß von Kapitalwert, sei es in Form von Geld oder Ware, und stets die Rückkehr des kreisenden Kapitalwerts bedingt in der Form, worin er vorgeschossen war. Von den Kreisläufen I und II ist der erstre festzuhalten, soweit hauptsächlich der Einfluß des Umschlags auf Mehrwertbildung ins Auge gefaßt wird; der zweite, so weit sein Einfluß auf Produktbildung.
three circuits, what tells them apart

The three forms — I) money going out and coming back as more money, II) production-elements going out and coming back as production-elements, and III) commodities going out and coming back as more commodities — differ from each other in this way. In Form II, the renewal of the process, the reproduction process, is expressed as something actually happening; in Form I it is expressed only as a possibility. But both of these differ from Form III in that the advanced capital-value — whether as money or as the material elements of production — forms the starting point, and therefore also the point of return. In the money circuit, the return is: the original sum plus an increment. If the process is renewed on the same scale, the original sum forms the starting point again, and the increment does not enter back into it — it only shows us that the original sum expanded itself as capital and so produced an increment, but then let go of it. In the production circuit, the capital-value advanced in the form of production-elements likewise forms the starting point, and this form includes its expansion — the production-elements at the close (P′) equalling the commodity-value (W′) in magnitude, though not in form. If simple reproduction takes place, the same capital-value, in the same form, starts its process over again. If accumulation takes place, an enlarged capital-value now opens the process. But it still begins with the advanced capital-value in its original form — only now a larger amount than before. In Form III, by contrast, the capital-value does not begin the process as something advanced — it begins as value already expanded, as the whole wealth present in the form of commodities, of which the advanced capital-value is only one part. This last form matters for the third section, where the movement of individual capitals is grasped in connection with the movement of the total social capital. It cannot be used, though, for the turnover of capital, which always begins with the advance of capital-value — whether as money or as commodities — and always requires the return of the circulating capital-value in the form in which it was advanced. Of the first two circuits, the first is the one to keep in view mainly where we're looking at the influence of turnover on the formation of surplus-value; the second, where we're looking at its influence on the formation of the product.

So wenig die Ökonomen die verschiednen Formen der Kreisläufe geschieden, so wenig haben sie dieselben mit Bezug auf den Umschlag des Kapitals getrennt betrachtet. Gewöhnlich wird die Form G ... G´ genommen, weil sie den einzelnen Kapitalisten beherrscht und ihm bei seiner Rechnung dient, selbst wenn das Geld nur in der Gestalt des Rechengelds Ausgangspunkt bildet. Andre gehn von der Auslage in Form der Produktionselemente aus, bis Rückfluß erfolgt, wobei von der Form des Rückflusses, ob in Ware oder Geld, gar nicht die Rede. Z.B.:
economists blurred these forms

Economists have drawn distinctions between the different circuit-forms about as little as they have kept them separate when it comes to the turnover of capital. Usually they take the money-going-out-and-coming-back-as-more-money form, because that's the one that governs the individual capitalist and serves him in his accounting — even where money is only the starting point as money of account. Others start from the outlay made in the form of the elements of production, and follow it through to the reflux, without saying anything about the form the reflux takes — whether commodity or money. For example:

"Der ökonomische Zyklus, ... d.h. der ganze Verlauf der Produktion, von der Zeit, wo die Auslage gemacht wird, bis der Rückfluß erfolgt ist." (Economic Cycle, ... the whole course of production, from the time that outlays are made till returns are received. In agriculture seedtime is its commencement, and harvesting its ending. <... Im Ackerbau ist die Zeit der Aussaat sein Anfang und die Ernte sein Ende.> - S. P. Newman, "Elements of Pol. Econ.", Andover and New York, p. 81.)
Newman's 'economic cycle', examined

One economic writer, S. P. Newman, called this the 'economic cycle' — his phrase for the whole course of production, from the time the outlays are made to the time the returns come in. In farming, he said, sowing is the start of it and harvest is the end.

Andre beginnen mit W´ (III. Form):
others start from the product

Others begin instead with commodities going out and coming back as more commodities — Form III.

"Die Welt des Produktionsverkehrs kann angesehn werden als umlaufend in einem Kreise, den wir einen ökonomischen Zyklus nennen wollen, und worin sie je einen Umlauf vollbracht hat, sobald das Geschäft, nach Vollzug seiner sukzessiven Transaktionen, wieder ankommt bei dem Punkt, wovon es ausgegangen. Der Anfang kann datiert werden von dem Punkt, wo der Kapitalist die Eingänge erhalten hat, vermittelst deren ihm sein Kapital zurückfließt; von welchem Punkt an er von neuem dazu schreitet, seine Arbeiter anzuwerben und ihnen ihren Unterhalt, oder vielmehr die Macht, ihn anzuschaffen, in Arbeitslohn auszuteilen; von ihnen die Artikel fertiggestellt zu erhalten, in denen er macht; diese Artikel auf den Markt zu bringen und dort den Kreislauf dieser einen Reihe von Bewegungen zum Abschluß zu bringen, indem er verkauft und im Erlös der Ware eine Wiedererstattung seiner ganzen Kapitalauslage empfängt." Th. Chalmers, "On Pol. Econ.", 2nd ed., Glasgow 1832, p. 85.)
Chalmers's 'economic cycle', examined

Th. Chalmers pictured the world of productive dealings as circulating in a ring, which he too called an 'economic cycle': the business completes one circuit whenever, after running through its successive transactions, it arrives back at the point it started from. On his account you could date the start from the point where the capitalist has received the takings that bring his capital flowing back to him — from which point he goes on again to hire his workers and hand out to them, in wages, their subsistence, or rather the means of buying it; to receive from them the finished articles he deals in; to bring those articles to market; and there to close the circuit of this one series of movements by selling them and receiving, in the proceeds, a repayment of his whole capital outlay.

Sobald der gesamte Kapitalwert, den ein individueller Kapitalist in einem beliebigen Produktionszweig anlegt, den Kreislauf seiner Bewegung beschrieben hat, befindet er sich wieder in seiner Anfangsform und kann nun denselben Prozeß wiederholen. Er muß ihn wiederholen, soll der Wert sich als Kapitalwert verewigen und verwerten. Der einzelne Kreislauf bildet im Leben des Kapitals nur einen Abschnitt, der sich beständig wiederholt, also eine Periode. Am Abschluß der Periode G ... G´ befindet sich das Kapital wieder in der Form des Geldkapitals, das die Reihe der Formverwandlungen, worin sein Reproduktions- resp. Verwertungsprozeß einbegriffen ist, von neuem durchläuft. Beim Abschluß der Periode P ... P befindet das Kapital sich wieder in der Form der Produktionselemente, welche die Voraussetzung seines erneuerten Kreislaufs bilden. Der Kreislauf des Kapitals, nicht als vereinzelter Vorgang, sondern als periodischer Prozeß bestimmt, heißt sein Umschlag. Die Dauer dieses Umschlags ist gegeben durch die Summe seiner Produktionszeit und seiner Umlaufszeit. Diese Zeitsumme bildet die Umschlagszeit des Kapitals. Sie mißt daher den Zwischenraum zwischen einer Kreislaufsperiode des gesamten Kapitalwerts und der nächstfolgenden; die Periodizität im Lebensprozeß des Kapitals, oder wenn man will, die Zeit der Erneuerung, Wiederholung des Verwertungs- resp. Produktionsprozesses desselben Kapitalwerts.
turnover: the circuit made periodic

As soon as the whole capital-value that an individual capitalist has laid out in some branch of production has completed the circuit of its movement, it is back in its starting form and can now repeat the same process. And it must repeat it, if the value is to keep perpetuating and expanding itself as capital-value. A single circuit is only one stretch in the life of capital — a stretch that keeps repeating itself, that is, a period. At the close of the period money-going-out-and-coming-back-as-more-money, the capital is once again in the form of money-capital, ready to run again through the whole series of form-changes that make up its reproduction, or rather its valorization process. At the close of the period production-elements-out-and-back-as-production-elements, the capital is once again in the form of the elements of production, which is what its renewed circuit presupposes. The circuit of capital, taken not as a one-off event but as a periodic process, is what we call its turnover. The length of this turnover is given by the sum of the capital's production time and its circulation time. This sum of time is the capital's turnover time. It measures the interval between one circuit-period of the whole capital-value and the next — the periodicity in the life-process of capital, or, if you like, the time it takes for the capital-value's valorization process, or its production process, to renew and repeat itself.

Abgesehn von den individuellen Abenteuern, die für ein einzelnes Kapital die Umschlagszeit beschleunigen oder abkürzen mögen, ist die Umschlagszeit der Kapitale verschieden je nach ihren verschiednen Anlagesphären.
turnover time varies by sphere

Setting aside the individual strokes of luck or misfortune that may accelerate or shorten the turnover time for any one capital, turnover time differs between capitals according to the different spheres in which they're invested.

Wie der Arbeitstag die natürliche Maßeinheit für die Funktion der Arbeitskraft, bildet das Jahr die natürliche Maßeinheit für die Umschläge des prozessierenden Kapitals. Die Naturbasis dieser Maßeinheit liegt darin, daß die wichtigsten Erdfrüchte der gemäßigten Zone, welche das Mutterland der kapitalistischen Produktion ist, jährliche Produkte sind.
the year as natural measure

Just as the working day is the natural unit for measuring the function of labour-power, the year is the natural unit for measuring the turnovers of capital as it goes through its process. The natural basis for this unit lies in the fact that the most important produce of the earth in the temperate zone — the home ground of capitalist production — comes in annual crops.

Nennen wir das Jahr als Maßeinheit der Umschlagszeit U, die Umschlagszeit eines bestimmten Kapitals u, die Anzahl seiner Umschläge n, so ist n = U/u. Beträgt also z.B. die Umschlagszeit u 3 Monate, so n = 12/3; das Kapital vollzieht 4 Umschläge im Jahr oder schlägt viermal um. Ist u = 18 Monate, so n 12/18 = 2/3 oder das Kapital legt in einem Jahr nur 2/3 seiner Umschlagszeit zurück. Beträgt seine Umschlagszeit mehrere Jahre, so wird sie also nach Vielfachen eines Jahres berechnet.
the turnover-number formula

Let's call the year, as the unit for measuring turnover time, U; the turnover time of a particular capital, u; and the number of its turnovers, n. Then n = U/u. So if, say, a capital's turnover time u is 3 months, then n = 12/3: the capital completes 4 turnovers in the year, or turns over four times. If u is 18 months, then n = 12/18 = 2/3 — the capital only covers two-thirds of its turnover time within a single year. Where the turnover time runs to several years, it is reckoned in multiples of a year.

Für den Kapitalisten ist die Umschlagszeit seines Kapitals die Zeit, wahrend deren er sein Kapital vorschießen muß, um es zu verwerten und in der ursprünglichen Gestalt zurückzuerhalten.
turnover time, from the capitalist's side

For the capitalist, the turnover time of his capital is the length of time he has to keep it advanced, in order to expand it and get it back in its original shape.

Bevor wir den Einfluß des Umschlags auf den Produktions- und Verwertungsprozeß näher untersuchen, sind zwei neue Formen zu betrachten, die dem Kapital aus dem Zirkulationsprozeß anschießen und auf die Form seines Umschlags einwirken.
two new forms still to come

Before we look more closely at how turnover affects the process of production and of valorization, there are two new forms to consider — forms that grow onto capital out of the circulation process and act on the shape its turnover takes.

Kap. 7
Turnover Time and Number of Turnovers
Chapters 1 to 6 followed capital through one circuit and asked what the circuit costs. This chapter asks what happens when the circuit REPEATS, and that question is what the rest of Part Two answers. Read the first sentence carefully: it is the one place in the chapter where the German uses one root for both the whole span and the market stretch inside it, and the English on screen inherits the collision.
As we have seen, the overall time of circulation of a given capital is the sum of its circulation time proper and its production time. It is the period of time that elapses from the moment that the capital value is advanced in a particular form until the return of the capital value in process in the same form.
turnover time defined

We've already seen this: the total time it takes a given capital to go all the way round — its turnover time — is made up of two parts added together: the time it spends circulating and the time it spends in production. This is the whole stretch from the moment a sum of capital-value is advanced in some particular form, until that same value, having gone through the whole process, comes back in that same form again.

The specific purpose of capitalist production is always the valorization of the value advanced, whether this value is advanced in its independent form, i.e. the money form, or in commodities, in which case its value form only possesses an ideal independence in the price of the commodities advanced. In both cases, this capital value passes through different forms of existence in the course of its circuit. Its identity with itself is established in the capitalist's ledger, or in the form of money of account.
the driving purpose: valorization

The determining purpose of capitalist production is always the valorization of the advanced value — a matter of the form itself, not of anyone's motives. That value may be advanced in its own independent form, as money, or as a commodity, where its value-form has only an ideal independence, showing up as a price. Either way, this capital-value passes through a series of different forms as it goes round its circuit. That it remains the same value throughout — its sameness with itself — is confirmed in the capitalist's account books, or in money of account.

Whether we take the form M . . . M' or the form P . . . P, both these forms include the following facts: (1) the value advanced functions as capital value and is valorized; (2) after describing its process, it returns to the form in which this process began.
In M . . . M', both the valorization of M, the value advanced, and the return of the capital to this form (the money form), are readily apparent. But the same thing also takes place in the second form. For the starting-point of P is the presence of the elements of production, commodities of a given value. This form includes the valorization of this value (C' and M') and its return to its original form, since in the second P the value advanced once again possesses the form of the elements of production in which it was originally advanced.
both circuits: valorized, then returned

Take either form — money going out and coming back as more money, or production-elements going out and coming back as production-elements — and both include two things: first, that the advanced value functioned as capital and expanded itself; second, that after completing its course it returned to the form it started in. In the money circuit, both of these are plain to see: the expansion of the advanced value and the capital's return to its starting form, the form of money. But the same thing happens in the production circuit. It starts from the presence of the elements of production — commodities of a given value — and it too includes the expansion of that value (showing up as more commodities, more money) and a return to the original form, since by the time the elements of production reappear at the end, the advanced value is once again in the shape of elements of production.

As we saw in the previous volume:
'If production has a capitalist form, so too will reproduction. Just as in the capitalist mode of production the labour process appears only as a means towards the process of valorization, so in the case of reproduction it appears only as a means of reproducing the value advanced as capital, i.e. as self-valorizing value' (Volume 1, Chapter 23, p. 711).
recalled: reproduction as reproducing capital

As was shown earlier: if production takes the capitalist form, so does reproduction. As Volume I put it: 'Just as, under capitalist production, the labour process appears only as a means to the process of expanding value, so reproduction appears only as a means of reproducing the advanced value as capital — that is, as value that expands itself' (Buch I, Kap. XXI, S. 588).

The three forms (I) M . . . M', (II) P . . . P, and (III) C' . . . C' are distinguished in the following ways. In form II (P . . . P) the repetition of the process, the process of reproduction, is expressed as a reality, whereas in form I it is only a possibility. Both of these, however, are distinguished from form III in so far as the capital value advanced – whether as money, or in the shape of the material elements of production – forms the starting-point and hence also the point of return. In M . . . M' the return is M' = M+m. If the process is repeated on the same scale, then M again forms the starting-point; m does not enter into it, but simply shows us that although M has been valorized as capital and thus created a surplus-value, it has cast this surplus-value off. In the form P . . . P, the capital value P advanced in the form of the elements of production forms the point of departure. The form includes its valorization. In the case of simple reproduction, it is the same capital value that begins its process again in the same form. In the case of accumulation, P' (possessing a value of M' or C') now starts the process as an increased capital value. But the process still begins with capital value advanced in the original form, even if with a greater value than previously. In form III, however, the capital value does not begin the process as capital value advanced, but as capital value already valorized, as the total wealth existing in the form of commodities, of which the capital value advanced forms only a part. This latter form is important for Part Three of the present volume, where the movement of individual capitals will be dealt with in its relationship with the movement of the total social capital. But it cannot be used for the turnover of capital, which always begins with the advance of capital value, in the form either of money or of commodities, and always requires the return of the circling capital value in the form in which it was advanced. Out of circuits I and II, the former will be adhered to in so far as the influence of the turnover on the formation of surplus-value is the main thing under consideration; the latter in so far as its influence on the formation of the product is concerned.
three circuits, what tells them apart

The three forms — I) money going out and coming back as more money, II) production-elements going out and coming back as production-elements, and III) commodities going out and coming back as more commodities — differ from each other in this way. In Form II, the renewal of the process, the reproduction process, is expressed as something actually happening; in Form I it is expressed only as a possibility. But both of these differ from Form III in that the advanced capital-value — whether as money or as the material elements of production — forms the starting point, and therefore also the point of return. In the money circuit, the return is: the original sum plus an increment. If the process is renewed on the same scale, the original sum forms the starting point again, and the increment does not enter back into it — it only shows us that the original sum expanded itself as capital and so produced an increment, but then let go of it. In the production circuit, the capital-value advanced in the form of production-elements likewise forms the starting point, and this form includes its expansion — the production-elements at the close (P′) equalling the commodity-value (W′) in magnitude, though not in form. If simple reproduction takes place, the same capital-value, in the same form, starts its process over again. If accumulation takes place, an enlarged capital-value now opens the process. But it still begins with the advanced capital-value in its original form — only now a larger amount than before. In Form III, by contrast, the capital-value does not begin the process as something advanced — it begins as value already expanded, as the whole wealth present in the form of commodities, of which the advanced capital-value is only one part. This last form matters for the third section, where the movement of individual capitals is grasped in connection with the movement of the total social capital. It cannot be used, though, for the turnover of capital, which always begins with the advance of capital-value — whether as money or as commodities — and always requires the return of the circulating capital-value in the form in which it was advanced. Of the first two circuits, the first is the one to keep in view mainly where we're looking at the influence of turnover on the formation of surplus-value; the second, where we're looking at its influence on the formation of the product.

Just as the economists have rarely distinguished between the different forms of the circuit, so too they have rarely considered these separately in connection with the turnover of capital. They have generally concentrated on the form M . . . M' because it is this that dominates the individual capitalist and is used by him in his calculations, even if money forms the starting-point only in the shape of money of account. Certain others proceed from outlays in the form of elements of production, finishing with the receipt of returns, without even mentioning the form of these returns, whether they are in commodities or money. For example:
economists blurred these forms

Economists have drawn distinctions between the different circuit-forms about as little as they have kept them separate when it comes to the turnover of capital. Usually they take the money-going-out-and-coming-back-as-more-money form, because that's the one that governs the individual capitalist and serves him in his accounting — even where money is only the starting point as money of account. Others start from the outlay made in the form of the elements of production, and follow it through to the reflux, without saying anything about the form the reflux takes — whether commodity or money. For example:

'The Economic Cycle . . . [is] the whole course of production, from the time that outlays are made till returns are received. In agriculture, seed-time is its commencement, and harvesting its ending' (S. P. Newman, Elements of Political Economy, Andover and New York, p. 81).
Newman's 'economic cycle', examined

One economic writer, S. P. Newman, called this the 'economic cycle' — his phrase for the whole course of production, from the time the outlays are made to the time the returns come in. In farming, he said, sowing is the start of it and harvest is the end.

Others begin with C' (form III):
others start from the product

Others begin instead with commodities going out and coming back as more commodities — Form III.

'The world of trade may be conceived to revolve in what we shall call an economic cycle, which accomplishes one revolution by business, coming round again, through its successive transactions, to the point from which it set out. Its commencement may be dated from the point at which the capitalist has obtained those returns by which his capital is replaced to him: whence he proceeds anew to engage his workmen; to distribute among them, in wages, their maintenance, or rather, the power of lifting it; to obtain from them, in finished work, the articles in which he specially deals; to bring these articles to market and there terminate the orbit of one set of movements, by effecting a sale, and receiving, in its proceeds, a return for the whole outlays of the period' (T. Chalmers, On Political Economy, 2nd edn, Glasgow, 1832, p. 85).
Chalmers's 'economic cycle', examined

Th. Chalmers pictured the world of productive dealings as circulating in a ring, which he too called an 'economic cycle': the business completes one circuit whenever, after running through its successive transactions, it arrives back at the point it started from. On his account you could date the start from the point where the capitalist has received the takings that bring his capital flowing back to him — from which point he goes on again to hire his workers and hand out to them, in wages, their subsistence, or rather the means of buying it; to receive from them the finished articles he deals in; to bring those articles to market; and there to close the circuit of this one series of movements by selling them and receiving, in the proceeds, a repayment of his whole capital outlay.

When the entire capital value that the individual capitalist invests in one branch of production or other has described its cyclical movement, it exists once again in its original form and can then repeat the same process. It has to repeat it, if the value is to be perpetuated and valorized as capital value. In the life of the capital, the individual circuit forms only a section that is constantly repeated, i.e. a period. At the close of the period M . . . M', the capital exists again in the form of money capital and passes once more through the series of changes of form that constitute its process of reproduction and valorization. At the close of the period P . . . P, the capital exists again in the form of the elements of production which constitute the premise of its repeated circuit. The circuit of capital, when this is taken not as an isolated act but as a periodic process, is called its turnover. The duration of this turnover is given by the sum of its production time and its circulation time. This period of time forms the capital's turnover time. It thus measures the interval between one cyclical period of the total capital value and the next; the periodicity in the capital's life-process, or, if you like, the time required for the renewal and repetition of the valorization and production process of the same capital value.
turnover: the circuit made periodic

As soon as the whole capital-value that an individual capitalist has laid out in some branch of production has completed the circuit of its movement, it is back in its starting form and can now repeat the same process. And it must repeat it, if the value is to keep perpetuating and expanding itself as capital-value. A single circuit is only one stretch in the life of capital — a stretch that keeps repeating itself, that is, a period. At the close of the period money-going-out-and-coming-back-as-more-money, the capital is once again in the form of money-capital, ready to run again through the whole series of form-changes that make up its reproduction, or rather its valorization process. At the close of the period production-elements-out-and-back-as-production-elements, the capital is once again in the form of the elements of production, which is what its renewed circuit presupposes. The circuit of capital, taken not as a one-off event but as a periodic process, is what we call its turnover. The length of this turnover is given by the sum of the capital's production time and its circulation time. This sum of time is the capital's turnover time. It measures the interval between one circuit-period of the whole capital-value and the next — the periodicity in the life-process of capital, or, if you like, the time it takes for the capital-value's valorization process, or its production process, to renew and repeat itself.

If we disregard the individual occurrences that may accelerate or shorten the turnover time of an individual capital, the turnover times of capitals differ according to their different spheres of investment.
turnover time varies by sphere

Setting aside the individual strokes of luck or misfortune that may accelerate or shorten the turnover time for any one capital, turnover time differs between capitals according to the different spheres in which they're invested.

As the working day forms the natural measuring unit for the function of labour-power, so the year forms the natural measuring unit for the turnovers of capital in process. The natural basis for this measurement is that the most important food crops in the temperate zone, the native ground of capitalist production, are annual products.
the year as natural measure

Just as the working day is the natural unit for measuring the function of labour-power, the year is the natural unit for measuring the turnovers of capital as it goes through its process. The natural basis for this unit lies in the fact that the most important produce of the earth in the temperate zone — the home ground of capitalist production — comes in annual crops.

If we call the year, as measurement unit of the turnover time, U, the turnover time of a particular capital u, and the number of its turnovers n, then n = U/u. If the turnover time u is three months, for example, then n = 12/3 = 4; the capital completes four turnovers in a year, or turns over four times. If u = 18 months, then n = 12/18 = 2/3; the capital only gets through two thirds of its turnover time in one year. If the turnover time amounts to several years, then it is reckoned in terms of multiples of a year.
the turnover-number formula

Let's call the year, as the unit for measuring turnover time, U; the turnover time of a particular capital, u; and the number of its turnovers, n. Then n = U/u. So if, say, a capital's turnover time u is 3 months, then n = 12/3: the capital completes 4 turnovers in the year, or turns over four times. If u is 18 months, then n = 12/18 = 2/3 — the capital only covers two-thirds of its turnover time within a single year. Where the turnover time runs to several years, it is reckoned in multiples of a year.

For the capitalist, the turnover time of his capital is the time for which he has to advance his capital in order for this to be valorized and for him to receive it back in its original shape.
turnover time, from the capitalist's side

For the capitalist, the turnover time of his capital is the length of time he has to keep it advanced, in order to expand it and get it back in its original shape.

Before we investigate more closely the influence of turnover on the production and valorization process, we have to consider two new forms which capital obtains as a result of the circulation process, and which affect the form of its turnover.
two new forms still to come

Before we look more closely at how turnover affects the process of production and of valorization, there are two new forms to consider — forms that grow onto capital out of the circulation process and act on the shape its turnover takes.