From: Michael Williams (michaelj.williams@TISCALI.CO.UK)
Date: Thu Nov 13 2003 - 07:24:47 EST
> -----Original Message----- > From: OPE-L [mailto:OPE-L@SUS.CSUCHICO.EDU] On Behalf Of Paul > Cockshott > Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2003 10:27 PM > To: OPE-L@SUS.CSUCHICO.EDU > Subject: Re: (OPE-L) Re: Dynamic value and natural price > > > ... > Paul > > ... > Capitalists are also concerned with real wealth which they > realise is only partially represented by money. But under capitalism Money can buy any item of 'real wealth' > It is for this reason that accounting practice tries to compensate for > the effects of inflation. This is primarily a pragmatic attempt to avoid confusing changes in wealth with mere changes in the unit of account. It doesn't speak to the ongoing abstraction from specific use-values that is money. > > ... > > Marx ... idea being that labout which contributes to the > production of the surplus product provides the surplus that > is re-invested in new plant and machinery, and in employing > more workers. Surplus Product in its money form is available to be so re-invested. Indeed in general surplus product must pass through the money form in order to be so invested. [The truism that a certain use-value composition of output is required in period one inorder to (re-)produce a certain use-value composition of output in period 2 is, of course, the kernel of useful truth in the post-Sraffian interpretations of Marx's economics. But it provides no necessary ground for a productive/unproductive labour distinction, which is, instead, based upon the social relations of production under which different labour is performed.] michael
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 14 2003 - 00:00:01 EST