From: Michael Schauerte (mikeschauerte@GMAIL.COM)
Date: Fri Apr 27 2007 - 00:31:40 EDT
Paul, Thanks for the link! I may be too "scientifically challenged" to benefit from the comparision you make but I will try to look through your writings on value. Mike > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: OPE-L on behalf of Pen-L Fred Moseley > Sent: Thu 4/26/2007 2:09 PM > To: OPE-L@SUS.CSUCHICO.EDU > Subject: Re: [OPE-L] Michael Schauerte > > Quoting Paul Cockshott <wpc@DCS.GLA.AC.UK>: > > > What analysis of the logic of exchange shows is that there must > > be a conserved scalar quantity in exchange. > > Hi Paul, > > Would you please explain this argument further? > Have you written it up somewhere? > If so, please send me a copy. > > I argue that Marx's argument in SEction 1 assumes that the general > system of commodity exchange is transitive (mutually consistent), from > which it follows that commodity exchange must be the exchange of > equivalents (as discussed in my previous post). Is your argument > similar to this, or different? > > Thanks. > > 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