Andrew [1243] wrote:
> Yes, Costas, exactly right. The unchanged simultaneist rate of profit
> when the physical wage bill and all else remains the same, and labor
> requirements change, makes no sense in terms of Marx's value theory.
and
> Only exchange-values matter in the simultaneist interpretation, not
> intrinsic value. So as long as changes in intrinsic value do not
> affect exchange-values (relative values and prices), then all value
> ratios, s/v, c/v, s/(c+v), etc. remain unaffected.
What has changed in your example is the labour required, which
must mean that people work more, harder, or there are more of them
working. Someone must have appropriated the benefits of this, even
if these benefits are contained in the same material substance. Your
theory must reflect these economic relations, which are of the first
order of significance. The higher rate of profit which would result
if one took Marx's approach, captures this connection very powerfully.
How does your approach deal with it?
I look forward to your reply.
Costas