From: Fred Moseley (fmoseley@MTHOLYOKE.EDU)
Date: Sun Jul 15 2007 - 23:07:43 EDT
Howard, again I think we may substantially agree.
When I talk about the “empirical explanatory power of Marx’s theory”, I
don’t mean a good fit between labor-times and prices. I disagree with
Paul on this point. Theoretically, I don’t think that Marx’s theory
predicts that prices in capitalism will be proportional to labor-times,
because of the equalization of the rate of profit.
When I say “empirical explanatory power”, I mean:
explanation of the necessity of money and the value of money
explanation of profit and the magnitude of profit
explanation of conflicts between capitalist and workers
over wages, and the working day, and the intensity of labor
explanation of inherent technological change, the
trend in the rate of profit, periodic crises, etc.
All these important phenomena in capitalism are explained as the
*necessary consequences* of SNLT as the substance of value.
The explanatory power of Marx’s theory on all these important phenomena
in capitalism is much greater than any other theory of value –
including especially the neoclassical supply and demand theory of
value, which can explain none of the above important phenomena.
As you put it, Marx’s theory provides an “explanatory structure” (SNLT
as the substance of value) that is “capable of accounting for the
empirical phenomena being investigated” (e.g. the phenomena listed
above).
Do you see any differences between what you are saying and what I am saying?
Thanks for your clarification.
Comardely,
Fred
----------------------------------------------------------------
This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Jul 31 2007 - 00:00:06 EDT