272 - 
satisfied, with a plausible value of (T , ify^ ^da^/V ^ is of 
the order of 1. , 
Does t4e inequality (49) hold in reality? Strictly 
/ / / / / / 
speaking the answer is, of course, that we do not know. We 
M Jr- Jr / . Jr f Jr 
shall only know, when the dependence of the reinvestment factor 
on utilisation is tested empirically, for example by comparing 
/ jT / / / / 
the reinvestment of different firms with different degrees of 
utilisation^/ In the meantime we can only diidge its plausibility. 
/ W / / / / / / 
What the condition comes to is very roughly this: if utilisation 
/ / / / X X 
declines by 0.01, the entrepreneurs will cut their investment 
by rather more than 1% below the level ,which it would have had 
iout the decline in utilisation. />nce we accent the idea 
/6f an influence/of utilisation on ^vestment aVall, there is 
nothing particularly extravagant An the quantitative condition. 
The importance of the hypothesis rests in its application 
/ // ^ — 
to the problem of maturity. With it we are able to explain Titty 
the growth rate of a capitalist economy, like the American one, 
/ 
begins to decline from a very high level at a certain stage, 
f / 
d we are able to explain it not as the result of fortuitous 
ircumstances, but as the outcome of a quasi ’’natural” develop- 
ent of the system. The endogenous explanation thus given 
is in fact a form of the under-consumption theory. It runs 
* • • 
A tendency for profit marginq-to rise exists probably v'• 
< —' ' 1 " m 
always in capitalism. Equally well, the discouraging effect of 
a fall in utilisation is probably always present, and of 
sufficient quantitative importance. But as long as competition 
- in the sense in which it is understood in this book - is 
strong, the rise in profit-margins and the concomitant full in 
utilisation will quickly bring about a competitive struggle 
which will result in elimination of capital and reduce the 
profit margins again. ^ The brake on the growth of the system 
i£suxj?i /ce-o fcr*-c> ^ c^Zj C. ca^