>At 04:45 98-11-06 +1030, Ian Hunt wrote:
>
>> "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