It's not so bad. It could be argued that the total or expanded
value-form covers both the expanded relative form of value (the relative
value of a commodity expressed by many other commodities) and the
"expanded equivalent form of value" or general form of value (a single
commodity expressing the relative value of other commodities).
On Thu, 2009-05-28 at 08:06 +0200, Jurriaan Bendien wrote:
> Thanks for your comment Phil. This is a serious oversight. My eyes got a bit
> blurry when it got very late, I read over the a's, b's, c's and d's and
> missed a couple of discrete transitions in the value form. Also, I lost a
> bit of text and formatting when I pasted the article into the wikipedia. I
> will correct the whole thing ASAP - Marx does provide a clear listing, in
> the contents of Vol. 1.
>
> Myy sincere thanks again for bringing this to my attention! A bit of an
> embarrassing fluke I'll say.
>
> Jurriaan
_______________________________________________
ope mailing list
ope@lists.csuchico.edu
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/ope
Received on Thu May 28 20:16:25 2009
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sun May 31 2009 - 00:00:03 EDT