>But, I'm not sure if anyone says that time isn't at all important
>in Marx. Even if one objects to the use of period analysis, as
>Paul C has done previously, there is no question that Marx at various
>times used a unit of time called a period. Indeed, it seems to me
>that the whole of VII would be incomprehensible without some concept
>of time.
Do you refer here to Vol II?
In that case, I do agree. I would say that in Vol I, part 2, we already
have the money capital circuit, which would be difficult to understand
without "some concept of time".
>So, I don't think that the debate is really about "time matters"
>vs. "time doesn't matter" in Marx.
Neither I. This would be extremely general.
>Everyone (I think) recognizes
>that there is a temporal component in Marx's analsis. When,
>however, we discuss more specific questions (such as formulas
>for the rate of profit) then the differences in perspective become
>more pronounced.
Yes. That's the point: How Marx's concept of capital circuit as a "temporal
sequence" is really taken into account in the calculation of, for example,
the profit rate.
A.R.>PS: sorry for the poor spelling, etc.. This account won't allow me
>to edit.
Well, sorry for the Spanglish!!