From: Dave Zachariah (davez@kth.se)
Date: Mon Jul 28 2008 - 07:58:21 EDT
GERALD LEVY wrote:
> > But I think the way "VLP" is used by Jerry leads to a weak theory.
>
>
> Hi Dave Z:
>
> How so?
Because it does not count the domestic labour necessary to reproduce the
capacity to work, which is significant in a historical analysis. That is
the problem if you try to use it like (b). On the other hand if you use
it like (a) you end up with very strange conclusions and extra
qualifications.
I made both of these points in:
http://ricardo.ecn.wfu.edu/~cottrell/OPE/archive/0712/0120.html
>
> > Rather I'd distinguish:
> > (a) the labour-value of the real wage
>
> Whose real wage?
>
The answer depends on the section of the working population you are
looking at. If you are interested in the national level you would look
at an average bundle of consumption goods.
//Dave Z
_______________________________________________
ope mailing list
ope@lists.csuchico.edu
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/ope
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Jul 31 2008 - 00:00:10 EDT