At 15:52 08/09/99 +0530, you wrote:
>Sorry Jurriaan! I was browsing through several e-mail messages and the
>"long discredited *embodied* labour theory of value", attracted my attention.
>There is no other "labor theory of value" worth talking about, by the way. All
>other variants of "labor theory of value" are basically childish. I think
>economic theory will not make much progress until we are clear about a
>questions: why Marxist theory needs a theory of value, and what question a
>of value is supposed to answer. Mumbo jumbos like instead of labor theory
>Marx had value theory of labor etc. are not going to do any good to Marxist
>theory. Cheers, ajit sinha
Whilst you express yourself more pungently than some others on this, I must
with the substance of what you say here.
Why do you think that we need a theory of value by the way?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Feb 27 2000 - 15:27:08 EST