> -----Original Message----- > From: owner-ope-l@galaxy.csuchico.edu > [mailto:owner-ope-l@galaxy.csuchico.edu]On Behalf Of Steve Keen > Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2001 1:52 PM > To: ope-l@galaxy.csuchico.edu > Subject: [OPE-L:5698] Re: Re: de-bunking the de-bunk > > > ... So with that start, any theory > which attempts to prove that the LTV is viable in any form > doesn't even get > to first base with me. It may be a LTV theory; but to me, it ain't Marx. How about a 'value-theory of labour' Steve? Less enigmatically, it is not at all clear to me that anything that could be called a labour theory of value informs all, if any, VF approach. > > ... I've already cut off both legs (the belief that > the LTV is Marx's fundamental theory of value, and the belief > that the LTV > is consistent with his theory of value). Neither of these is my VF approach. > Now VFT and TSS interpretations > are threatening to bite me to death. Who?, Where? Why wasn't I invited? Can I watch? If you want to de-bunk any VF approach, Steve, it seems reasonable to ask you to read at least a few key works first - rather than assuming that they can be lumped in with a heterogeneous collection of other interpretations/developments of Marx ... or? michael
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sun Jul 15 2001 - 10:56:28 EDT