80 SOCIAL SCIENTIST
wages were to be the same would unequal exchange cease to exist? Sau's mathematics would say ^cs". His words, however, are quite different. "Let it be emphasised... that although mathematically unequal exchange owes its origins to the postulate of wage differential between two countries, raising the wage rate of the poor country to the level of the rich country's is certainly no answer to the problem." In other words, the theoretical-cum-mathematical model does not identify the basis of unequal exchange. It docs not point to the root of the problem; it does not tell us what is it which must change before unequal exchange comes to an end.
The Basic Contradiction
The model could perhaps still have some limited relevance in understanding a percpheral issue but for one basic contradiction. Following Sau's model there is no reason why there should be any trade at all. This can be seen quite clearly in his final inequality:
b/[l—a(l+r)] > (b—Ab)/[l—(a+Aa)(l+r)] where
b « labour per unit of commodity c&9
a = input of commodity "a* in one unit of the same commodity
r == rate of profit in the underdeveloped country and the advanced
capitalist country
The left hand side of the inequality refers to the exports of the underdeveloped country and the right hand side to the exports of the advanced capitalist country. The fact that these two commodities are traded is just assumed in the model. As long as the rates of profit arc the same there is no reason within the model for trade to take place. For that matter, Sau puts it better in his criticism of Braun: "The uniform profit rate that prevails in the... economics of A and B in the wake of international trade must belong within the range defined by the two individual profit rates obtained in A and B respectively in the absence of trade. Why then would the bourgeoisie of the country with the higher profit rate engage in trade with the other country?" In other words, instead of basing his model on his critique of Emaneui and Braun, Sau ambles into the model building game and promptly commits the same mistakes or perhaps worse ones. Braun's model is not in a perfect competition framework (thereby giving room for external factors to cause trade) while Sau's attempt is to show that "the country with the lower wage rate gives out more labour than what it gets back under balanced trade even with perfect competition in full force."
The attempt right through the second chapter seems to be one of theorizing for theorizing's sake. In fact, the mechanisms of imperialism which he outlines later, having nothing to do with his mathematical model, seem to be far more meaningful. There does seem to be a great deal of truth when he talks of the advanced capitalist countries over-