John wrote:
>What does the transformation problem look like if we try to
>do it backwards? That is, most "solutions" follow Marx and
>attempt to explain the transformation of values into prices of
>production. Why not transform prices of production into values?
>
>That is, assume a set of capitals in which the rate of profit is
>uniform and the compositions of capital differ. In moving from
>this initial state which we call Period I to the next, assume
>that one of the capitals which is above average in composition
>grows at a faster rate than the others, the rate of profit remaining
>the same. Does an hour of abstract labor in Period I create the
>same amount of value as it does in Period II? The same problem
>arises if a capital of lower than average compostion grows at a
>faster than the others.
Simon writes:
I don't understand the specification. Why should anything different happen
in Period II if the uniform rate of profit does not change?
Simon Mohun,
Dept of Economics,
Queen Mary and Westfield College,
Mile End Road,
London E1 4NS,
UK
Telephone: 0171-975-5089
Fax: 0181-983-3580