On 9 December 2010 01:50, Ian Wright <wrighti@acm.org> wrote:
>
> However, I think that in Dave's empirical work
> he actually got hold of independent labor hours worked (from
> government studies), and found the same close correlation. So no
> circularity here. Is that correct Dave? Or do I misremember?
>
You are right. The Swedish data sets contains figures on the labour
input measured in 1000 persons per annum for each sector. Hence the
estimated labour values of Swedish industry outputs are *not*
'aggregate dollar costs' but labour content. (p.5,
http://reality.gn.apc.org/econ/Zachariah_LabourValue.pdf)
Bichler & Nitzan's claim that "labour values, just like utils, cannot
be shown to exist" is hard to sustain. You may have to dismiss most of
physics on their grounds. The point is that the amount of labour
required to reproduce commodities is measurable in principle,
estimated in practice and has testable consequences.
//Dave Z
_______________________________________________
ope mailing list
ope@lists.csuchico.edu
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/ope
Received on Thu Dec 9 04:08:31 2010
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Dec 31 2010 - 00:00:02 EST