[OPE-L:3712] Re: Re: Fred M.'s interpretation

From: Andrew Brown (Andrew@lubs.leeds.ac.uk)
Date: Wed Aug 23 2000 - 12:42:44 EDT


[ show plain text ]

Hi Fred,

Your reply did help. Slowly, I think I am beginning to grasp what is
going on!

One point of clarification (which will probably reveal more of my
ignorance!):

you stated on your earlier 3697:

---
Marx divided the initial M into two theoretically significant 
components: constant capital and variable capital (i.e M  =  C + V). 
 Since the initial M is taken as given, so are its two components (C 
and V). Constant capital is the component of M that is affected by 
capital gains and losses. Therefore, the constant capital that is 
taken as given is the adjusted constant capital (i.e. the constant 
capital in current costs).   
---

You later post implied, I think, that V is *also* adjusted. This would seem to be necessary if V is the same before and after the transformation, as you say is the case in your later post. On the other hand, is this adjustment of V justified on your 'capital gains' argument?

Does your published work refer to the 'capital gains' argument?

Many thanks,

Andy



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Aug 31 2000 - 00:00:04 EDT