From: GERALD LEVY (gerald_a_levy@MSN.COM)
Date: Wed Dec 12 2007 - 13:26:50 EST
> I think the concept of "value of labour-power" is a bit problematic. Hi Dave: Perhaps - let's talk about it. Is the following the only reason you think so? > Would it not be better to explicitly distinguish:> (a) the labour-value of the real wage> (b) the total labour (social *and* domestic) necessary to reproduce> the capacity to work> Therefore if "the price of wheat goes up in the next 3 months but falls> afterwards, then during those 3 months real wages would decline ceteris> paribus", and so would (a), which I interpret as the "value of labour-power". I think it's helpful to distinguish between wages and the VLP. How would you explain, for instance, counteracting factor #2 to the tendency for the general rate of profit to fall (reference: _Capital_, Volume 3, Ch. 14, Section 2) without reference to the distinction between wages and the VLP? In solidarity, Jerry
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Dec 31 2007 - 00:00:04 EST