From: Paul Zarembka (zarembka@BUFFALO.EDU)
Date: Fri May 23 2003 - 13:09:54 EDT
Sorry, my typo. It should have been "neither Rubin nor Kliman", not Laibman (but he doesn't wish to confuse value with exchange value either). Paul *********************************************************************** "Confronting 9-11, Ideologies of Race, and Eminent Economists", Vol. 20 RESEARCH IN POLITICAL ECONOMY, Paul Zarembka, editor, Elsevier Science ******************** http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/PZarembka On Fri, 23 May 2003 glevy@PRATT.EDU wrote: > Paul Z wrote on May 23: > > >> Value is first identified with exchange value, ... > > But neither Rubin nor Laibman do this. See: > > Rubin, I. I. 1927, "Abstract Labor and Value in Marx's System", > > translated by K. Gilbert, Capital and Class, Volume 5, Summer 1978, pp. > > 107-139. > > Kliman, A. J. 2000, Marx's Concept of Intrinsic Value", Historical > > Materialism, No. 6, pp. 89-113. > > Did you mean to write "neither Rubin nor Laibman nor Kliman" > or when you wrote 'Laibman' was that a typo and did you intend > to write 'Kliman'? > > I don't recall, off-hand, the title of the paper by David L > that included a critique of other interpretations, including > VFT and the TSSI, but I recall that it was presented at a > IWGVT a few years ago -- although it's not at the IWGVT web > site, I believe. > > In solidarity, Jerry > > >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat May 24 2003 - 00:00:01 EDT