Re: [OPE-L] Capital in General

From: Andrew Brown (A.Brown@LUBS.LEEDS.AC.UK)
Date: Thu Oct 20 2005 - 09:12:52 EDT

Next message: glevy@PRATT.EDU: "Re: [OPE-L] Capital in General"
Previous message: Rakesh Bhandari: "Re: [OPE-L] Capital in General"
Maybe in reply to: Michael Heinrich: "Re: [OPE-L] Capital in General"
Next in thread: Rakesh Bhandari: "Re: [OPE-L] Capital in General"
Reply: Rakesh Bhandari: "Re: [OPE-L] Capital in General"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

Rakesh and Chris,

Actually Chris's post is useful in showing just how far a variant of
value form theory can get towards a the sort of position I am
advocating. It is still not far enough, in my view, because the emphasis
is still too strongly upon the appearance form of value (money and
price) as opposed to the essence of value (congealed abstract labour) as
the stress on 'form determination' makes clear. So I have got a lot out
of the discussion - am not frustrated any more! - and am happy to agree
to disagree for now.

Many thanks,

Andy

Next message: glevy@PRATT.EDU: "Re: [OPE-L] Capital in General"
Previous message: Rakesh Bhandari: "Re: [OPE-L] Capital in General"
Maybe in reply to: Michael Heinrich: "Re: [OPE-L] Capital in General"
Next in thread: Rakesh Bhandari: "Re: [OPE-L] Capital in General"
Reply: Rakesh Bhandari: "Re: [OPE-L] Capital in General"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Oct 21 2005 - 00:00:03 EDT