[ show plain text ]
Hi Ajit,
This is brief and partial response to your (3588), in response to Duncan's
(3587). I am afraid that we disagree so completely that discussion may be
difficult, but let's see.
I would like to focus first on the question of the DEFINITION of constant
capital and variable capital. I will be happy to discuss later the
question of the DETERMINATION of the magnitudes of constant capital and
variable capital, but I would first like to focus on the prior question of
the definition of these two key components of capital in Marx's theory.
I argue that Marx defined constant capital and variable capital in terms of
MONEY - as the quantities of money-capital invested in the first phase of
the circulation of capital to purchase means of production and labor-power,
respectively. In other words, constant capital and variable capital are
the two components of the money-capital M that initiates the circulation of
capital: M - C - M' (i.e. M = C + V). Capital itself is defined in terms
of money, as money that becomes more money (the title of Part 2 of Vol. 1
is "The Transformation of MONEY into Capital"); therefore, these two
components of capital are also defined in terms of money (as indeed are all
the components of capital).
I think the textual evidence for this monetary interpretation of the
definitions of constant capital and variable capital is overwhelming: the
monetary nature of the circulation of capital, the initial definitions of
constant capital and variable capital in Chapter 8 of Vol. 1, discussions
and numerical examples throughout the three volumes, etc.
You, on the other hand, argue (as I understand it) that Marx defined his
concepts of constant capital and variable capital in units of labor-time,
as the labor-time embodied in the means of production and the means of
subsistence, respectively.
Ajit, what textual evidence do you have for this interpretation?
How do you interpret the circulation of capital (M - C - M'),
or the "transformation of money into capital"?
The monetary magnitudes of constant capital and variable capital may be
DETERMINED by labor-times (i.e. proportional to the labor-times embodied in
the means of production and the means of subsistence); as mentioned above,
I will discuss this later. But I don't see how one can say that constant
capital and variable capital are DEFINED in terms of labor-times. Or maybe
I am misinterpreting you. Would you please explain?
Comradely,
Fred
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Aug 31 2000 - 00:00:02 EDT