Riccardo wrote in [OPE-L:5057]:
> Just for the record, I fear the concern is mine and not Duncan's. The point
> is: if this is a serious problem, how can it be said that value is created
> in production and only afterwards realized in circulation? Even for net
> product as the result of direct labour, the question remains: how can the
> labour producing the net product being considered as homogeneous before
> circulation? If so, talking of a postulate or stipulation, without further
> qualifications, may be is not enough.
It is in the systematic and generalized _exchange_ of *labour-power for
money* that the value-relationship is created. This is logically a
prerequisite for capitalist production even if workers, in practice, are
generally paid in arrears.
Viewed from that perspective, labor-power has a homogeneous character
as quality [its character as source of value and surplus-value] which
comes to be expressed as quantity through the value-form. Yet, the
heterogeneity of labor-power -- labour as diversity -- can give
rise to variations in the magnitude of surplus-value and wages.
In solidarity, Jerry