Marx stated that constant capital contributed no new value to the production - that its contribution was equivalent to its depreciation, and thus on the balance

Marx stated that constant capital contributed no new value to the production - that its contribution was equivalent to its depreciation, and thus on the balance, zero. This is more of his pure economic illiteracy and quackery. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constant_capital#Why_%22constant%22 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constant_capital#Why_%22consta...? So no, Marx did NOT recognize "the value that [the investors'] capital provided" in the production of goods/services. His silly theory put the net value contributed by the capital at zero. Apparently working for years to create a machine that can automate berry picking is identical in value to picking berries every day for years - the long-term investment of time into a project to raise productivity added no value according to him. The man and his economic theories are absurd. In one sense, they are exactly what they claim to be: anti-capitalist. They are hostile to the processes that build capital.