> "value" to mean the labour-time
>socially necessary for the production of any given commodity."
>
>That is what I think it is too, but there are lots of questions about what
>that means exactly.
>
>
Chai-on Lee would like to intervene in the above argument.
Value is not the labor-time, the magnitude of value is determined by the
labor-time socially...etc.
Value is not identical with its magnitude.
So, value is not the labor-time Ian suggested.
Value can be explained in three aspects, its substance, its magnitude, its
form.
People identify value with labor. If then, they cannot reply to the
question of what is unproductive labor.
What is the difference between value and labor then?
labor has many different forms, past labor, dead labor, present labor,
living labor, concrete labor, abstract labor, unproductive labor,
productive labor, etc. Value also has many different fomrs, market price,
market value, social value, individual value, production price, etc.
Labor is not directly lead to the amking of value unless it is congealed in
a product. Living labor itself is not value itself but has use-value and
exchange value both as a commodity.
With Regards,
Chai-on
Professor of Economics,
Dept.of Economics,
Chonnam National University
Kwang-ju, 500-757,S Korea,
(Tel) +82-62-530-1552
(Fax) +82-62-530-1559
(E-m) conlee@chonnam.chonnam.ac.kr