Hi Steve, You wrote in 4095: When Marx put this proposition to himself in terms of exchange-value and use-value, however, he made the following statement: "It also has to be postulated (which was not done above) that *the use-value of the machine significantly (sic) greater than its value*; i.e. that its devaluation in the service of production is not proportional to its increasing effect on production." (The Grundrisse, p. 383. Emphasis added.) This would mean, of course, that the value transferred by the machine could exceed the value of the machine itself, which is the same case as for labor. My comment: I don't get it. My problem here starts with the quote from Marx. At first, he seems to be comparing the "use-value" for the machine with its "value." But if we keep reading (after the ie) he seems to be comparing increases in productivity with the amount of devaluation. That is, a 30% increase in productivity will not lead to a 30% decrease in the value of the machine. One way to make sense of his remark. Now how you get to the idea that the value transferred by the machine could exceed the value of the machine is something I really don't see. John
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Oct 31 2000 - 00:00:09 EST