From: ajit sinha (sinha_a99@YAHOO.COM)
Date: Tue Jun 01 2004 - 06:21:30 EDT
--- Riccardo Bellofiore <riccardo.bellofiore@UNIBG.IT> wrote: > At 0:22 -0700 1-06-2004, ajit sinha wrote: > >--- Riccardo Bellofiore > <riccardo.bellofiore@UNIBG.IT> > >wrote: > >> Ajit, > >> > >> on your first point, I wonder how you can think > a > >> proposition can be > >> formally incorrect if it follows necessarily > from an > >> argument > >> according to which all the social product > represents > >> in money nothing > >> but living labour, extracted in a specifici > social > >> way: the problem > >> may be how to articulate price and value, not > that > >> value is "nothing > >> but" that monetary expression in that definite > >> social form. > >________________________ > > > >Riccardo, Let's leav aside the problem of what is a > >"social product". It is not clear what you mean by > >"all the social product", though. If you mean gross > >product, then not many Marxists would agree with > your > >statement. My guess is that you mean net product. > >Well, then now look at what could "living labour" > >mean. Here you are talking about all the direct > labor > >performed in one production period. All these > direct > >labors are of different kinds, such as carpentary, > >masonary, etc. They are different kinds of concrete > >labor. So unless you somehow add up these concrete > >labors you cannot put the so called "living labour" > >against money, and that's your problem. > > No: because I have ante-validation through bank > finance to > production. I agree with you that without some > social validation > before exchange labours cannot be added. My point > for me is that > labour as labour, that is as activity, for Marx was > clearly BOTH > concrete and abstract (not immediately social, but > tentatitvely so: > Rubin). The point is that to secure this point the > validation must be > monetary, and must be ex ante. ______________________ How do you measure labor in terms of $? The unit of labor is time. So we need to know how is labor measured in terms of time. ___________________________ > > > > >My point was not that a statement such as "the > value > >of a commodity x is 10 hours of socially necessary > >abstract labor" is wrong. Actually I think it is > >right. But I want Rakesh or you or anybody else to > >first commit that it is either right or wrong, so > that > >we can move to next logical stage of the problem. > Now, > >it appears that you think that the above statement > is > >right. Then we have to think how does one arrive at > >the measure of "10 hours of labor". > >______________________ > > I think that to arrive to that - after one and forty > hundred years - > we have to change in some way the structure of the > argument. Realize > that Marx's was not an individual price theory > (first); second, > translate it in "macro" terms; third, assume that > supply meets > demand, not because of Say's Law but because of > something akin to the > principle of effective demand with short-run firm's > expectations > realized. One done that, I guess that you can say > that value is C + > mLL, where C = MPp also at the individual level. __________________ Can you tell me what mLL and mPP stand for? Cheers, ajit sinha > > But I am interested in reading your discussion with > rakesh going on. > > riccardo > -- > > Riccardo Bellofiore > Dipartimento di Scienze Economiche > "Hyman P. Minsky" > Università di Bergamo > Via dei Caniana 2 > I-24127 Bergamo, Italy > e-mail: riccardo.bellofiore@unibg.it > direct +39-035-2052545 > secretary +39-035 2052501 > fax: +39 035 2052549 > homepage: http://wwwesterni.unibg.it/dse/homepage/bellofiore.htm __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger. http://messenger.yahoo.com/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jun 02 2004 - 00:00:01 EDT