[OPE-L:3456] Re: Marx and historical costs

Fred Moseley (fmoseley@laneta.apc.org)
Thu, 17 Oct 1996 06:43:22 -0700 (PDT)

[ show plain text ]

At 08:12 AM 10/15/96 -0700, you wrote:
>Fred wrote in [OPE-L:3411]:
>
>> Andrew argued instead in that discussion that constant capital is valued at
>> the prices prevailing at the BEGINNING of the CURRENT production period. I
>> argued the "current reproduction costs" position that constant capital is
>> valued at the END of the current period.
>
>The beginning or the end?
>
>Well ... *before* the next production period can begin, capitalists must
>convert the s produced into profit before they have the money capital
>required to purchase c + v for the next production period. In a sense,
>this process, the conversion of s into profit and reinvestment in c + v ,
>occurs *after one period but before the beginning of the next period*.
>However, if one is forced to choose [as I think one must], then it would
>seem to me that the prices for c prevailing at the end of one period are
>more germane than the prices prevailing at the beginning of the next
>period since the decisions about how much c + v can and are advanced, must
>logically be made *prior* to the beginning of the next period.
>
>Or am I missing something?
>
>In Solidarity,
>
>Jerry
>

You are right and I think Andrew agrees with you. Andrew assumes that the
the prices at the beginning of the current period are the same as the prices
at the end of the previous period. I should probably be clearer about this
in my discussion of his interpretation of the transformation problem. But
the real issue is between these two prices (which are the same) and the
prices at the end of the current period, which may be different.

Comradely,
Fred