I try to resolve this as follows: Congealed abstract labour is *qualitatively* internally related to its appearance form (money): the quasi-separate existence of abstract labour depends upon the generalised existence of money. In this sense I do not agree with Fred's stress on 'independence'. Yet, it remains the case that the *magnitude* of price is tethered by the magnitude of abstract labour time. In this sense I agree with what Fred is getting at (it is plainly what Marx is getting at too). In other words, abstract labour and money are (quite plainly) not immediately identical, despite their internal relation, therefore their respective magnitudes are not immediately identical either. But the magnitude of price is tethered by the magnitude of labour time (and the quasi-separate existence of abstract labour is dependent upon the generalised existence of money). This is a tricky and important issue. For example, I mostly follow Murray on this, but I think that Murray himself is prone to incorrectly view the above distinction of labour time and price magnitude as a Ricardian mistake. Best wishes, Andy
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sun Jul 15 2001 - 10:56:29 EDT