On Fri, 02 Feb 2001, you wrote: > Now this conceputal innovation is helpful in understanding Marx for > whom value is a kind of latent quality of commodities which manifests > itself as clearly present only upon successful monetary ex-change or > "collapse" onto the money price "vector" (of course not everything > which has assumed the commodity form and sold for a price possess the > quality of value, but no commodity which has not sold for a price is > a--or possesses--value). > I would say that values are not a property of the commodity but a property of the system of production that made them. > It thus makes no sense to speak of the valorization of value as > parallel to the expansion of money which is simply the necessary (and > only) form of appearance of value (though value is necessarily > misrepresented by money price). I agree >At any rate, value is necessarily > represented in money; and value expansion can only obtain in and > through money. what is money in this context? -- Paul Cockshott, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, Scotland 0141 330 3125 mobile:07946 476966 paul@cockshott.com http://www.dcs.gla.ac.uk/people/personal/wpc/ http://www.dcs.gla.ac.uk/~wpc/reports/index.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Mar 01 2001 - 14:01:38 EST