On Wed, 09 May 2001, you wrote: > It is not at all clear to many why we should > incorporate within a critique of capitalism a > predictive model of [market] price behavior. > Without a causal and hence predictive theory of price one can have no basis for the theory of relative surplus value, to take just one instance from Marx's work. I could equally well have said no theory of differential ground rent. Without a theory of relative surplus value or of differential rent, one is unable to analyse the basis of the incomes and class interests of the two main exploiting classes. I would say that that would seriously undermine ones analysis of capitalism. > Of those mentioned above and in this thread, > I see the following division (I'll use your > terminology): > > o political-economic theories should > incorporate a predictive theory of price > behavior: > -- the simple labour theory of value; > -- Sraffa's formulation of price of > production theory. > o political-economic theory does not require, > nor should it include, a predictive theory > of price behavior: > -- Value-Form theories; > -- The TSS theory of prices. > > (Note: I don't think that it is accurate to speak > of a "TSS theory of prices". I think this rests > on a mis-interpretation of the purpose and > meaning of the TSSI. Well if the TSS people do not have a theory of prices what is the point of their work on the transformation problem, whose subject matter is the theory of price? How do they propose to critique the Okishio theorem if they have no theory of price? I think you misrepresent them. >Relatedly, I don't think > that Marx had a predictive theory of price > either. Indeed, I think this was not one of his > concerns. Of course, if I am wrong in this > assessment of TSS, then John E or someone > else should correct me.) If it was not one of his concerns, his theoretical efforts with respect to the transformation problem are incomprehensible. He was attempting, as he saw it to address what had been seen as one of the major flaws of the Ricardian theory of price - its apparent contradiction between the labour theory of value and the assumption of equal returns to capital in different branches of production. Marx in many places makes predictive statements about prices of the form IF the labour rewuired to spin cotton falls THEN the price obtained for cotton by spinners will fall Without an underpinning of predictive statements like this the whole analysis of capitalist industrialisation falls apart. > > So ... I guess the question becomes: is it > a merit for a theory of capitalism to have a > predictive theory of price? > Yes > An odd thought occurs to me: in their rejection > of predictive models, Hegelian-Marxism (in one > of its guises as VFT) and Althusserian-Marxism > (through the doctrine of over-determination) are > in agreement. Rare indeed! > As I would regard myself as strongly influenced by Althusserian writings, I would dispute this. Over-determination relates to the relationship between social levels, and has nothing to do with the theory of price. It is not the same as overdetermination of a series of price equations. > So, I'm not convinced that it is a merit to have > a predictive theory of price. BUT, if a theory > _does_ have such a component, then I think > it is fair to judge the theory in part by the > accuracy of its predictions. AND, since there > is a claim that one theory has superior powers > in terms of explaining empirical matters, then > it is fair to put such a theory to the TEST by > asking that theory TO PREDICT price behavior > and then compare the ex ante predictions with > the ex post prices. This leads me to ask: what > does your predictive theory of price tell you > about what will happen in the next 6 months > and year in the UK and the US economies? > > Isn't that a fair question? It is a fair question, but to anwser it I would need up to date figures on labour inputs for all sectors, plus data on product flows between sectors. This is in principle capturable, but the data-sets are not currently collated. What one has to work with are I/O tables produced typically on a 5 yearly basis. This allows one to do hypothetical studies of the effects of changes in labour productivity in individual industries etc, but I have never done these myself. > > In solidarity, Jerry -- 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 : Sat Jun 02 2001 - 00:00:06 EDT