Prospect of profits from new investments has not encouraged a real spout of real capital accumulation, anemic compared to China's growth of capital stock rising 10% per year which as Andrew Glyn points out is four times the rate of Northern countries. That growth moreover is financed almost entirely from internal resources.
Rate of profit here seems to have been bolstered by centralization and wage repression but that hardly encourages optimism. And then it gets dim as one expects a petering out of the stimuli from large federal deficits and mortgage refinancing. It may well be time for the Democrats to take power again.
Despite high profit rate in US we may still see a flood of capital exports simply because as high as the profit rate on investments made in the US, it simply does not pay to accumulate.
The rate of profit can remain positive as over-accumulation is neared and reached.
I also don't get your profit theory. If you subscribe to LTV, then how could wage repression account for a lot of the profit rate incline since as mechanization proceeds the relative number of workers must decline and as Marx says no matter how exploited two workers are they can't produce as much surplus value as 24. Aren't you suggesting a theory of profits at odds with the theory of labor value? Are you a closet Sraffian?
At any rate, I would pay careful attention to Grossman and Harvey. I think I saw a pamphlet written by Shaikh in 1988 or so that expressed implicit agreement with Grossman's theory of overaccumulation. Banaji's translation circulated at the New School before it was made available by James Heartfield and friends to the hoi polloi.
Rakesh