From: Philip Dunn (hyl0morph@YAHOO.CO.UK)
Date: Thu Apr 05 2007 - 15:28:47 EDT
On Wed, 2007-04-04 at 12:48 -0700, Michael Perelman wrote: > I don't see any way of doing it scientifically. It's just a mistake that was > unanticipated, just like the production of a product that wastes away because nobody > buys it. > > On Wed, Apr 04, 2007 at 07:59:54PM +0100, Philip Dunn wrote: > > > > I haven't been clear enough. The question is how, ex post, to distribute > > value transfer over the life of an asset for the purposes of value > > accounting. If we have no way of doing that we are unable to draw up ex > > post value accounts. > > > > -- > Michael Perelman > Economics Department > California State University > Chico, CA 95929 > > Tel. 530-898-5321 > E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu > michaelperelman.wordpress.com Ex ante, clearly, it is not possible. But ex post I feel we must be able to do it. Marx did have a discussion of "the labour that transfers value" associating with useful labour. I tend to think that there is no need to have anything that "does" value transfer. It is just a question of the association of costs and revenues, accruals based accounting. I do admit that I cannot derive the proposition that non-wage costs should be distributed, ex post, in proportion to revenue. It is just that I cannot come up with anything else that accords with my take on value theory. ___________________________________________________________ All New Yahoo! Mail – Tired of Vi@gr@! come-ons? Let our SpamGuard protect you. http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Apr 30 2007 - 00:00:16 EDT