[OPE-L:4537] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: what is Volume 1 about?

From: Fred B. Moseley (fmoseley@mtholyoke.edu)
Date: Sat Nov 18 2000 - 00:35:19 EST


On Sat, 11 Nov 2000, Rakesh Narpat Bhandari wrote:

> Part of the confusion results from how c, v and s take on different 
> meanings in the determination and the resolution of value.
> 
> In the determination of value, we have the value of means of 
> production consumed (c) plus the new value value added [v (1 + s/v)].
> 
> 
> c +  v(1 + s/v) => C
> 
> New value added here merely represents the direct labor time embodied 
> in the output. In short we have indirect and direct labor time.
> 
> However, the value of a commodity (C) is monetarily resolved into 
> cost price (c + v) and surplus value (s) in its many forms: profit, 
> rent, interest, etc.
> 
> C => (c+v) + s
> 
> Marx substitutes
> 
> C=> k + s



Rakesh, what is your textual evidence for this intepretation of constant
capital and variable capital as having two different meanings, one for the
determination of value and the other for the monetary resolution of
value?  I don't know of any passage in which Marx said anything like this.  

I think that for Marx, constant capital and variable capital are always
DEFINED consistently in the same way - as the sums of money-capital
invested to purchase means of production and labor-power.  Means of
production and labor-power are purchased with money, not with labor-time.

Constant capital and variable capital (as these money quantities) could be
DETERMINED as proportional to the labor-times quantities required to
produce the means of production and means of subsistence, but the
DETERMINATION of constant capital and variable capital is a separate issue
from the DEFINITION of these variables.  

Rakesh, you don't need this "dual" interpretation of constant capital and
variable capital to maintain the essentials of your interpretation.  You
could argue that:

1.  C and V are DEFINED in terms of money, in both the determination and
the monetary resolution of value.  

2.  But the money-quantities of C and V are DETERMINED as proportional to
the labor-times quantities required to produce the means of production and
means of subsistence.

All the rest of your conclusions would still follow.  


I thought this is what you accepted in your recent "Fred is correct" post
(4444), that constant capital and variable capital are "monetary
sums".  Did I misunderstand you?  

Comradely,
Fred


   



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Nov 30 2000 - 00:00:05 EST