From: Paul Cockshott (wpc@dcs.gla.ac.uk)
Date: Mon Feb 25 2008 - 06:52:08 EST
I say that in Kantorovich valuations arise from the objective structure of production 'Given the Plan Ray'! Alejandro Agafonow wrote: > > Paul, > > > > But production price or /natural value/ is very much the same of > labour content. The Norwegian Austro-liberal Trygve Hoff in his > /Economic Calculation in the Socialist Society (1938)/, also wrote > that motor-headlights or tillers could serve as reference signal if > properly used. > > > > The problem is that most Marxists think that production price has both > roles: (1) reference signal and (2) state of the control system. > Overcoming this contradiction has been the kernel of yours and > Cottrell's model. > > > > Unfortunately, I think you don't realize it yet. That's why you assert > following Kantorovich that "valuations arise from the objective > structure of the conditions of production". This assertion contradicts > the function of prices in your model, that is: (2) state of the > control system. > > > > But this carries us to our former debate about the gravitation centre: > labour or prices? And I have not time to develop further this debate > right now. As I said, I'm going to write a paper dealing with the issue. > > > > Kind regards, > > Alejandro Agafonow > > ----- Mensaje original ---- > De: Paul Cockshott <clyder@gn.apc.org> > Para: Outline on Political Economy mailing list <ope@lists.csuchico.edu> > Enviado: lunes, 25 de febrero, 2008 11:54:43 > Asunto: [OPE] Valuations, the Austrians and Kantorovich reply to Alejandro > > Alejandro Agafonow wrote: > > > > Yes Paul, I agree with you. > > > > When Austrians refers to "value", they mean subjective value, that is: > > utility, /ophelimite/. But you know that Mises recognized that labour > > time could serve as counting unit, even though he had further > > objections to its use. > > > > Concerning energy I'm not so sure. That's because you need a further > > devise to link counting unit and subjective preferences. In your model > > this is made by a sort of prices expressed in labour tokens. > > > > But, what kind of equivalent devise you can think for energy? > > > I do not advocate it, but the method would be the same, you would mark > all goods with the number of Joules that they required to make them, pay > incomes out in Joules accounts and allow people to purchase up to this > limit. If demand fell short of supply one would have to decide that part > of the energy expended was 'socially unecessary energy' and discount the > sale price whilst energy use was cut from that sector. > > The general points form here are: > > 1. It is possible to carry out a form of decentralised and locally > approximate economic optimisation if one has some scalar valuation of > all inputs. It does not matter what the unit of account is. > > 2. Any system of control needs two signals, the reference signal > indicating what we want to achieve, and the current state of the > controlled system. > picture of feedback loop > in the model Allin and I argue for, the reference signal is labour > content and the current state of the controlled system is the clearing > price of the good. I think that basically the same reference and control > signals optain in capitalism. But one could have other reference and > control signals, many marxian economist argue that the reference signal > is production price not value. One could also hypothesise social > relations in which the reference signal was 'CO2 emission content'. > > 3. Kantorovich shows that valuations arise from the objective structure > of the conditions of production, his objectively determined valuations. > The point I make about approximativity in point one is that these ODVs > are local -- they obtain only in the neighbourhood of the point of > intersection between the convex hull of the production frontier and the > plan ray. They do not convey the same information under other conditions > a) when one is in the interior of the convex hull ( ie when there are > slack resources in the system ) > b) when one is at a different point on the surface of the hull > > What the development of interior point methods shows is that one can > perform the types of economicaly rational calculations that, according > to the Austrian school, are supposed to require prices and valuations, > by use of other mathematical methods -- the use of potential functions > which one maximises. > > > > Alejandro Agafonow > > > > > > ----- Mensaje original ---- > > De: Paul Cockshott <wpc@dcs.gla.ac.uk <mailto:wpc@dcs.gla.ac.uk>> > > Para: Outline on Political Economy mailing list > <ope@lists.csuchico.edu <mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu>> > > Enviado: lunes, 25 de febrero, 2008 0:55:28 > > Asunto: RE: [OPE] devaluation and revaluation of variable capital > > > > «The kernel of Mises's theory of calculation is this: while > > calculation in terms of money prices is the essential intellectual > > tool of entrepreneurs acting in a market economy, calculation in terms > > of "value" is impossible. A calculus can only be performed with > > multiples of an extended unit; for example, one can add one apple to > > another apple or one grain of silver to another grain of silver. In > > contrast, one cannot add a telephone to a piano concerto and still > > less can one add wittiness to silence. These things are > > incommensurable and therefore cannot be linked through mathematical > > operations. So it is with value. One cannot quantify the value of a > > thing because value is not extensive and therefore not measurable. > [...] > > However, value can be qualitatively "imputed" from consumer goods to > > factors of production, in the sense of a value dependency: those > > factors of production are valuable only because they serve to produce > > valuable consumer goods. But there is no such thing as quantitative > > value and thus no value calculation; there is only price calculation.» > > (Jörg Guido Hülsmann. /Mises: The Last Knight of Liberalism, > > /www.mises.org/books/lastknight.pdf > > <http://www.mises.org/books/lastknight.pdf> pp. 399-400) > > > > Kind Regards, > > > > Alejandro Aagafonow > > > > That objection hardly applies to any embodied theory of value, whether > > the embodied unit be labour or energy. The embodied quantity is > > expressed as a scalar projection along a single dimension and can thus > > be used in economic calculation. > > > > ----- Mensaje original ---- > > De: Jurriaan Bendien <adsl675281@tiscali.nl > <mailto:adsl675281@tiscali.nl>> > > Para : Outline on Political Economy mailing list > <ope@lists.csuchico.edu <mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu>> > > Enviado: lunes, 11 de febrero, 2008 21:31:05 > > Asunto: [OPE] devaluation and revaluation of variable capital > > > > Alejandro, > > > > Your reply does not seem very intelligent to me, though you are > > obviously intelligent. I am not a Marxist at all, and I do not think > > that Marx exhaustively describes or explains all the phenomena of > > economic value. I have never argued that either, as far as I am aware. > > Nor do I think that Marx claimed anything like that. > > > > Although I don't prefer Ernest Mandel's style (though he writes > > clearly, at least), he makes a perfectly valid point: > > > > "[Marx's Capital] was never intended as a handbook to help governments > > to solve such problems as balance-of-payments deficits, nor yet as a > > learned, if somewhat trite, explanation of all the exciting happenings > > in the marketplace when Mr Smith finds no buyer for the last of his > > 1,000 tons of iron. It was intended as an explanation of what would > > happen to labour, machinery, technology, the size of enterprises, the > > social structure of the population, the discontinuity of economic > > growth, and the relations between workers and work, as the capitalist > > mode of production unfolded all its terrifying potential. >From that > > point of view, the achievement is truly impressive." (Cap. Vol. 1, > > Penguin intro, p. 22-23). > > > > I could quibble with phrases such as "terrifying potential", but the > > main point is fair enough I think. > > > > I do not understand how marginal utilities provide any useful > > precision, because "utility" is something which is barely quantifiable > > as such, if at all. I can quantify "utility" only by finding proxies > > which, according to some argument, provide an indicator of utility, > > but the whole thing quickly becomes tautological. Of interest to me is > > not an ideological justification of the rationality or usefulness of > > markets, I'm convinced they have their place, but an explanation of > > how they really function, never mind the bullshit, and that's much > harder. > > > > If you know anything about the world economy, you know that "scarcity" > > does not ultimately explain very much about the allocation of global > > resources, and anyway the very concept of scarcity is as problematic > > as the concept of value, insofar as it has both subjective and > > objective aspects. I would not deny that scarcity is an important > > allocative principle or that scarcity can influence prices, but > > insisting on that doesn't solve any problem, since there are many > > different kinds of scarcity. If scarcity is to have any explanatory > > power, I would need to get highly specific about what sort of scarcity > > we are talking about. > > > > The concept of "average socially necessary labourtime" refers to a > > relationship between supply of products and the need for those > > products, recognized via effective demand. That concept may not be > > adequate for an economist interested in the optimal allocation of > > (scarce) resources, but it was adequate for the purpose of Marx's > > critique of political economy. Marx was hardly an expert in the > > optimal allocation of resources, I mean, he couldn't even make an > > independent living on his own strength. He had great strengths, but > > that wasn't one of them. > > > > I'll try one of these days, if I see an opportunity, to visit Austria > > , and I will see if I come to different or better conclusions. For the > > rest, I do think a number of points you make are quite valid and I can > > learn from them - in that sense you are fighting the wrong guy. That > > aside, these topics are very complex, and I regret to say I have not > > yet found an adequate way to express my ideas about them effectively, > > in a very concise way. I do not have the leisure to think through the > > problems thoroughly as I would like, to get to a good crisp > > formulation of their essence. That is why I am rather reluctant to say > > a lot about it at this stage. Other OPE-Lers can do so better than I > > can, and it's better if I mainly follow the discussion. > > > > My reference to gross output is not trivial, since the total number of > > actual and ideal prices extant in the world is a multiple of the > > prices implied in gross output. Marx was primarily concerned with the > > valuation of the new output of capitalist production, not all prices, > > or all assets, for which labour-value may be largely irrelevant. > > > > Jurriaan > > > > > > > > -----Sigue archivo adjunto en el mensaje----- > > > > _______________________________________________ > > ope mailing list > > ope@lists.csuchico.edu <mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu> > <mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu <mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu>> > > https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/ope > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > ¿Con Mascota por primera vez? - Sé un mejor Amigo > > Entra en Yahoo! Respuestas > > > <http://es.rd.yahoo.com/evt:51361/*http:/es.answers.yahoo.com/dir/index;_ylc=X3oDMTE4ZWhyZjU0BF9TAzIxMTQ3MTQzMjIEc2VjA0Jhbm5lcgRzbGsDQWNxdWlzaXRpb24-?link=over&sid=XXXXXXXXas> <http://es.rd.yahoo.com/evt:51361/*http:/es.answers.yahoo.com/dir/index;_ylc=X3oDMTE4ZWhyZjU0BF9TAzIxMTQ3MTQzMjIEc2VjA0Jhbm5lcgRzbGsDQWNxdWlzaXRpb24-?link=over&sid=XXXXXXXX> > > > > > > > -----Sigue archivo adjunto en el mensaje----- > > > > _______________________________________________ > > ope mailing list > > ope@lists.csuchico.edu <mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu> > <mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu <mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu>> > > https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/ope > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > ¿Con Mascota por primera vez? - Sé un mejor Amigo > > Entra en Yahoo! Respuestas > > > <http://es.rd.yahoo.com/evt:51361/*http://es.answers.yahoo.com/dir/index;_ylc=X3oDMTE4ZWhyZjU0BF9TAzIxMTQ3MTQzMjIEc2VjA0Jhbm5lcgRzbGsDQWNxdWlzaXRpb24-?link=over&sid=XXXXXXXXn> <http://es.rd.yahoo.com/evt:51361/*http://es.answers.yahoo.com/dir/index;_ylc=X3oDMTE4ZWhyZjU0BF9TAzIxMTQ3MTQzMjIEc2VjA0Jhbm5lcgRzbGsDQWNxdWlzaXRpb24-?link=over&sid=XXXXXXXX> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > _______________________________________________ > > ope mailing list > > ope@lists.csuchico.edu <mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu> > > https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/ope > > > > _______________________________________________ > ope mailing list > ope@lists.csuchico.edu <mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu> > https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/ope > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > ¿Con Mascota por primera vez? - Sé un mejor Amigo > Entra en Yahoo! Respuestas > <http://es.rd.yahoo.com/evt:51361/*http://es.answers.yahoo.com/dir/index;_ylc=X3oDMTE4ZWhyZjU0BF9TAzIxMTQ3MTQzMjIEc2VjA0Jhbm5lcgRzbGsDQWNxdWlzaXRpb24-?link=over&sid=XXXXXXXX> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > ope mailing list > ope@lists.csuchico.edu > https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/ope > _______________________________________________ ope mailing list ope@lists.csuchico.edu https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/ope
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Feb 29 2008 - 00:00:03 EST