The capital of Department I has grown from 6,000 to 6,500, i.e. by one-twelfth; in Department II it has grown from 1,715 to 1,899, i.e. by just over one-ninth.
At the end of the next year, the results of reproduction on this basis are:
| I. | 5,417c | + | 1,083v | + | 1,083s | = | 7,583 |
| II. | 1,583c | + | 316v | + | 316s | = | 2,215 |
| Total: | 9,798 | ||||||
If the same ratio is maintained in the continuance of accumulation, the result at the end of the second year is as follows:
| I. | 5,869c | + | 1,173v | + | 1,173s | = | 8,215 |
| II. | 1,715c | + | 342v | + | 342s | = | 2,399 |
| Total: | 10,614 | ||||||
And at the end of the third year:
| I. | 6,358c | + | 1,271v | + | 1,271s | = | 8,900 |
| II. | 1,858c | + | 371v | + | 371s | = | 2,600 |
| Total: | 11,500 | ||||||
In the course of three years, the total social capital has increased from I.6,000 + II.1,715 = 7,715 to I.7,629 + II.2,229 = 9,858, and the total product from 9,000 to 11,500.
Accumulation in both departments here proceeds uniformly, in marked difference from the first example. From the second year onwards, both departments capitalise half their surplus value and consume the other half. A bad choice of figures in the first example thus seems to be responsible for its arbitrary appearance. But we must check up to make sure that it is not only a mathematical manipulation with cleverly chosen figures which this time ensures the smooth progress of accumulation.
In the first as well as in the second example, we are continually struck by a seemingly general rule of accumulation: to make any accumulation possible, Department II must always enlarge its constant capital by precisely the amount by which Department I increases (a) the proportion of surplus value for consumption and (b) its variable capital. If we take the example of the first year as an illustration, the constant capital of Department II must be increased by 70. And why? because this capital was only 1,430 before.