Michael L.,
thank you for the more clarified reply.
Michael A. Lebowitz wrote in 4856:
> On the other hand, you describe a social process which seems to occur
> only within the sphere of production (the physiological expenditure of
> human power). In this case, your main focus is the "reduction" of
> skilled to simple labour (which has been a theme in a number of your
> postings). Are these two questions (1--determination of a quantity of
> simple labour via some form of reduction/"mapping" and 2-- determination
> of whether a commodity contains value/abstract labour) inseparable for
> you?
I think I tend to think these two questions are inseparable. When I write
"a mapping" that quantatively interpretes concrete usefull labor to
abstract labor, I talk about the relation between the two questions. If
the commodity to be produced has no possibility to be usefull for others
than the producer, the mapping must reflect it as interpreting such
concrete "labor" having no quantity of abstract labor. So the social needs
must be one of key elements to form the mapping.
More concretely, if goods A is produced excessively and a certain amount
of it go to inventory, I think they still contain value that is
quantatively equivalent to those sold successfully.
in solidarity,
Iwao
Iwao Kitamura
ikita@st.rim.or.jp