[OPE] replacement cost and historical cost (again)

Quick question, which will help me in some current work. Very much
appreciate any answers.

(A) It seems to me that the only concept of (socially necessary)
labor-value that Marx uses in Capital is replacement cost; that is,
the SNLT of a commodity is the total labor required given current
production techniques. So the labor-embodied in a commodity is a
property of a commodity in the context of the current forces of
production.

(B) Some interpreters see another concept of SNLT; that is, the labor
embodied in a commodity is the labor that *was* expended to make it,
i.e. historical labor costs. So the labor-embodied in a commodity is a
property of the commodity, regardless of context.

Would it be controversial to state that Marx everywhere and always
meant (A) and not (B)?

Thanks,
-Ian.
_______________________________________________
ope mailing list
ope@lists.csuchico.edu
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/ope
Received on Mon Aug 31 15:25:12 2009