From: clyder@gn.apc.org
Date: Wed Dec 04 2002 - 04:35:12 EST
Quoting "Fred B. Moseley" <fmoseley@mtholyoke.edu>: > > This is a couple of brief replies to Nicky's (8058) which unfortunately I > deleted by mistake. (Hi, Nicky) > > Nicky said: > > "... all that matters (to the production of surplus-value) is that the > wage-bill ... does not exhaust value added. Magnitude is therefore not > terribly interesting." > > > My reply: > > Nicky, how could one explain why "the wage bill does not exhaust value > added" unless one has a quantitative theory of value added? Value added > and the wage bill are both quantities, and the difference between them - > surplus-value - is also a quantity. Therefore, the explanation of why > value added is greater than the wage-bill requires a quantitative theory > of value added. > The problem is to explain why the rate of surplus value is positive, what limits wages? You can not explain this at the level of value theory, what you need is some theory of the aggregate class dynamics of the economy to explain the regulation of wages. I am not of course saying that Marx and the Classicals lacked such theories, only that value theory is not itself an adequate answer to Nickys point.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Dec 05 2002 - 00:00:00 EST