Ramos
>
>If points "1)" and "2)" were CAUSES or SOURCES of deviation
>between production prices and values they cannot "act" in
>the case of the average commodity. This is clear because
>in the average commodity there is not difference AT ALL
>between value and production price. So, neither "cause 1)"
>nor "cause 2)" could act in the case of average commodity.
Paul C:
it depends upon how you define the average commodity.
If the average commodity has an average value organic
composition you would be right, if on the other hand
it has an average price organic composition, there remains
the possibility that constant capital used in it has
been purchased above or below its value.
>From the point of view of its price being indifferent to the effects
of changes in the rate of exploitation, one has to assume that
the average commodity is one with an average price composition
of capital. As such, it remains susceptible to second order
variations in its price due to price value deviations in
the components of constant capital. The only real 'average
commodity' is a weighted average, as in Sraffas basic commodity.
It was, in my opinion, a real stroke of insight by Sraffa to
come up with an average commodity in this sense.
Paul Cockshott
wpc@cs.strath.ac.uk
http://www.cs.strath.ac.uk/CS/Biog/wpc/index.html