From: Pen-L Fred Moseley (fmoseley@MTHOLYOKE.EDU)
Date: Sun Apr 22 2007 - 10:18:12 EDT
Quoting ajit sinha <sinha_a99@YAHOO.COM>: > --- Pen-L Fred Moseley <fmoseley@MTHOLYOKE.EDU> wrote: > >> I don’t understand this argument, which you repeat >> several times. >> Which capital goods are you thinking about that are >> inputs to many >> industries in general? Oil? It seems to me that >> most capital goods >> are quite industry specific, and are used in only >> one industry, or a >> small group of industries. If so, then changes in >> the values of >> capital goods do not have a general effect on the >> values of many final >> goods, as you suggest. > ------------------------------- > Fred, I agree with most of what you say about Marx's > prices of production and the classical natural prices. > However, your above statement is flat out wrong. If > there is technical change in any capital goods sector, > the values of all the goods must change. That > particular capital good does not have to physically > inter the production of every commodity. But it does > inter them indirectly since a capital good by > definition is a basic good. Cheers, ajit sinha Ajit, what about capital goods used only for the production of non-basic goods? The further removed a capital good is from the production of a given final good, the less effect a change in the value of the capital good will have on the price of production of the final good. The most significant causes, by far, of a change in the price of production of a final good is a change in its own value, or a change in the value of capital goods which enter directly into the production of the final good. Comradely, Fred ---------------------------------------------------------------- This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Apr 30 2007 - 00:00:17 EDT