>This is a general response to Rakesh's recent posts. I hope to address >the main issues between us. > > >1. To begin with, my interpretation is NOT that price is determined by >the sum of cost-price and surplus-value (and I don't think this is >Andrew's interpretation either). > >I have explained in several papers (including my recent RRPE paper on the >"new solution" we discussed last summer) and numerous OPEL posts >(including two long ones back in August, #3697 and #3698) that, according >to my interpretation of Marx's theory, price (P) is determined by the sum >of transferred value (TV) and new-value (NV); i.e. > >(1) P = TV + NV > >I have argued further that TV is equal to the given money constant capital >(i.e. equal to the actual sums of money-capital invested in the purchase >of means of production), and that NV is determined by the product of m >(money-value produced per hour) and Lc (the number of hours of current >abstract labor); that is, Fred, I need some evidence that Marx determined the value of a commodity by adding to NV the value of the money sum needed to purchase (at current costs?) the means of production used up in making it. I have given you evidence where Marx refers only the value of the used up means of production themselves as the transferred value. rb
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Nov 30 2000 - 00:00:05 EST