re Fred's 4536 > >Thanks for your clarification in (4500) and (4501) of the units involved >in your interpretation of the "determination of value" and the "monetary >resolution of value". I just think you need to be more explicit about the >conversion of units from labor-time to money before the resolution. As I >said in my last post, maybe you were more explicit in previous posts which >I missed, but not in the posts I was responding to. This is both my fault and Marx's fault. I agree with you that in Capital 3, ch 9 we are not dealing with labor values per se. Yet it seems to me that Marx has assumed throughout this chapter that the monetary expression of labor value is one or--what seems the same thing to me?--that the unit of account of is the unit of labor time. >However, there may be a deeper issue here: is Volume 1 about the >determination of labor-time quantities or about the determination of money >quantities? You know my answer. I thought you said back in (4444) that >you agreed with me about this, but now I am not so sure. Again while I agree that Marx is trying to show why money price is the necessary form of appearance of value or why the value potentiae is only actualized upon succcessful ex-change, it does seem to me that Marx has value determined in terms of labor time alone. The price expression of this commodity value the necessary form of appearance of which is money price depends on the monetary expression of labor value. Following Grossmann, I argue that Marx fixes this, and holds it constant in the course of analysis. Yours, Rakesh
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Nov 30 2000 - 00:00:05 EST