Steve wrote: > Once you admit that this is wrong--that Marx did use this analysis, as well > as arguing the "unique aspects of the commodity labour-power" > approach--then you have a problem. You have to find a definition of > use-value which lets you conclude that labour alone has the use-value > needed to produce surplus-value. These inevitably end up making the > use-value of machine qualitative--something like they assist labour-value > produce value--rather than the quantitative definition Marx used for the > use-value of labour. > Steve, it doesn't 'inevitably involve' the utter absurdity of making the use value of machines purely quantitative. Please refer back to our previous exchange on this, especially, OPEL 4135 and 4138. Andy
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Oct 31 2000 - 00:00:12 EST