Whoops; missed a couple of Jerry's queries (your posts turn up on my machine with small fonts). The measure of use-value, when use-value is quantitative, is the same as the measure of exchange-value or value: units of labour-time, with the potential measurement being via a Sraffian reduction to dated labour. Using labour-time as a measure of value is quite consistent with arguing that it is not the *only* source of value. The machine would have two measures: the exchange-value, which would be equivalent to the exchange-value of the inputs to its production (including other machines and labour-power, themselves all reducible to dated labour plus a commodity residual); the use-value would be calculable ex-post only, as indeed is the value of labour (as opposed to labour-power) itself. Steve At 04:25 PM 3/16/01 +1100, you wrote: >Quite willing to at a later date Jerry, but only if you state whether you >accept my argument that in Marx's theory of value, use-value can be >quantitative. If you don't accept that--on the basis of my previous post >(and all previous relevant ones! -:>), then there's no point discussing it >further: we'll simply be arguing past each other, with you believing that >use-value must be qualitative and hence dismissing my arguments. > >Cheers, >Steve >At 10:43 PM 3/15/01 -0500, you wrote: >>Re Steve K's [5179]: >> >>The discussion with John was informative--in fact, John spotted the >>numerical example which I had missed in my first reading of the >>Grundrisse. But it failed to satisfy me for the same reason that your >>comment fails to satisfy me, in that John would not accept the contention >>that use-value could be quantitative. >>---------- >>*What is the unit of measurement, then, of use- >>value? How is its magnitude measured?* >>---------- >>Far from being inconsistent with Marx's perspective on the creation of >>value, it is integral to it: in the case of inputs to production, >>use-value is *quantitative*, not qualitative. This is precisely the >>manner in which he derives the result that labor-power is a source of >>surplus-value in Capital: >>--------------- >>*Labor time can be measured -- even though it >>gets tricky because what is being measured >>is *socially necessary labor time* rather than >>just labor time. If use value, you emphasize, >>is quantitative then h-o-w is it measured?* >>---------------- >><snip, JL> >>in general, your statement above is an accurate statement of what Marx >>claimed. However, it is *not* true of that one example I gave: there Marx >>did quite explicitly--in his use-value/exchange-value language linked to >>the issue of the *difference* between value creation and >>depreciation--consider that the value transferred to output by a machine >>could be greater than the value it contains: "It also has to be >>postulated (which was not done above) that the use-value of the machine >>significantly greater than its value; i.e. that its devaluation in the >>service of production is not proportional to its increasing effect on >>production." >> >>------------------------ >>*Alas, you did not take up my challenge to defend >>that interpretation by placing it +within the context+ >>of the examples and paragraphs preceeding and >>following the quote.* >>In solidarity, Jerry >Dr. Steve Keen >Senior Lecturer >Economics & Finance >Campbelltown, Building 11 Room 30, >School of Economics and Finance >UNIVERSITY WESTERN SYDNEY >LOCKED BAG 1797 >PENRITH SOUTH DC NSW 1797 >Australia >s.keen@uws.edu.au 61 2 4620-3016 Fax 61 2 4626-6683 >Home 02 9558-8018 Mobile 0409 716 088 >Home Page: http://bus.macarthur.uws.edu.au/steve-keen/ Dr. Steve Keen Senior Lecturer Economics & Finance Campbelltown, Building 11 Room 30, School of Economics and Finance UNIVERSITY WESTERN SYDNEY LOCKED BAG 1797 PENRITH SOUTH DC NSW 1797 Australia s.keen@uws.edu.au 61 2 4620-3016 Fax 61 2 4626-6683 Home 02 9558-8018 Mobile 0409 716 088 Home Page: http://bus.macarthur.uws.edu.au/steve-keen/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon Apr 02 2001 - 09:57:29 EDT