From: glevy@PRATT.EDU
Date: Wed Apr 27 2005 - 13:20:53 EDT
> But why must an initial explanation of the > production of surplus-value necessarily include an account of > mechanisms that expand the money supply? Hi Ian: I think Paul C's point is that it is already implied in the formula M - C - M'. In a sense, I think he is right. I.e. in the formula M - C - M', and indeed in the theory of the money-form, there is an unexplored and necessary presupposition -- namely, the role of the state in (co-) determining the quantity of money in circulation. Paul C's way of addressing this issue is to suggest a state theory of money. Another way of theorizing the issue is to recognize that a more concrete level of abstraction than that examined in _Capital_ the role of the state in the determination of the money supply has to be recognized and systematically explained. In other words, it's Book 4 stuff. But, before you can get to Book 4, don't you have to examine the subject of classes (i.e. the topics of Books 2 and 3)? In solidarity, Jerry
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Apr 28 2005 - 00:00:02 EDT