From: ajit sinha (sinha_a99@YAHOO.COM)
Date: Thu Jun 03 2004 - 00:48:13 EDT
--- clyder@GN.APC.ORG wrote: > Quoting ajit sinha <sinha_a99@YAHOO.COM>: > > > --- Riccardo Bellofiore > <riccardo.bellofiore@UNIBG.IT> > > wrote: > > > About the MEL, I am satisfied with Foley. > > __________________ > > > > But Foley's position contradicts yours and > Rakesh's > > and others. Foley simply adds up various kinds of > > concrete labors such as the labor of carpenters > and > > masons etc. to get his total direct labor, which > is > > what he places against the total money value of > the > > net output to derive the labor value of one unit > of > > money. It does not solve your problem of abstract > > labor since the value of the money commodity is > simply > > based on adding up concrete labors. So I think you > > need to rethink on this problem. Cheers, ajit > sinha > > __________________ > > > > Surely by adding them up one abstracts from their > concrete type, and adds up all that remains - > expenditure > of human time. ______________ Exactly! So the abstraction has been done by the theorist before money comes into the picture. Cheers, ajit sinha > > > > > > > > > > > > __________________________________ > > Do you Yahoo!? > > Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger. > > http://messenger.yahoo.com/ > > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > This message was sent using IMP, the Internet > Messaging Program. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger. http://messenger.yahoo.com/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Jun 04 2004 - 00:00:01 EDT