Re: [OPE-L] questions on the interpretation of labour values

From: Paul Cockshott (wpc@DCS.GLA.AC.UK)
Date: Sun Mar 18 2007 - 12:42:15 EDT


I beg to differ. A soon as you try to compute aggregate figures
for the capitalist class as a whole you get these problems

Paul Cockshott

www.dcs.gla.ac.uk/~wpc



-----Original Message-----
From: OPE-L on behalf of Pen-L Fred Moseley
Sent: Sun 3/18/2007 2:26 AM
To: OPE-L@SUS.CSUCHICO.EDU
Subject: Re: [OPE-L] questions on the interpretation of labour values
 
Quoting Paul Cockshott <wpc@DCS.GLA.AC.UK>:

> Ian:
> Ajit, on the specific and narrow issue of whether M, as the total
> money-capital advanced, can be taken to as given data, the answer is
> of course yes. M appears in many different forms no doubt, from cash
> to electronic transfers to firm accounts, but nonetheless it is a real
> quantity,  as objective as the physical inputs arriving at the factory
> gates.
>
> Paul:
>
> Physical inputs are easy to identify but change the definition of
> the forms you will accept for M and you get very different quanties.
>
> 1. Does it mean cash balances ( notes and coin, cash in hand )
> 2. Does it mean credit balances with the banking system?
> 3. Does it include overdrafts with the banks?
> 4. Does it include overdraft rights with the banks?
>
> When summing 2 and 3  above is the answer 2+ |3| or 2+3 or |2+3| ?

Paul, the M that we have been discussing is not the supply of money.
Rather, the M is the quantity of money capital advanced to purchase
means of production and labor-power (i.e. the M in M - C ... P ... C' -
M'), in whatever forms of money is used to make the purchase.  So in
principle, these quantities of money capital are just as easy to
identify as the physical inputs.

Comradely,
Fred




> To whom is the money capital advanced?
>
> To workers? - but they are paid in arrears
> To other capitalists? in which case how does one form a sum of it
> over all capitalists?
>
>
> Paul Cockshott
>
> www.dcs.gla.ac.uk/~wpc
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: OPE-L on behalf of Ian Wright
> Sent: Fri 3/16/2007 5:44 PM
> To: OPE-L@SUS.CSUCHICO.EDU
> Subject: Re: [OPE-L] questions on the interpretation of labour values
>
>> Ajit:
>> How much is your M, Fred? Just tell me how much is
>> your M. If you are going to begin your theory with a
>> given M, you need to know how much it is. I'm not
>> asking for any explanation, just tell me how much it
>> is. Where do you get your data for M? If you are
>> unable to tell us how much is your M, then how could
>> you claim that M increases to (M + dM)? Just think
>> about it?
>
> Ajit, on the specific and narrow issue of whether M, as the total
> money-capital advanced, can be taken to as given data, the answer is
> of course yes. M appears in many different forms no doubt, from cash
> to electronic transfers to firm accounts, but nonetheless it is a real
> quantity,  as objective as the physical inputs arriving at the factory
> gates. One of my difficulties with Sraffa is that his objectivism does
> not extend to counting money-flows in the economy. The man in the moon
> is, as it were, blind to monetary character of capitalist production.
>



----------------------------------------------------------------
This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Mar 31 2007 - 01:00:12 EDT