Subject: [OPE-L:1673] Re: Re: Re: Re: determination of value transferred
From: Paul Cockshott (wpc@dcs.gla.ac.uk)
Date: Mon Nov 15 1999 - 04:57:32 EST
At 14:33 11/11/99 -0500, you wrote:
>Again, this is not Fred's fault. No one could do so. It simply
>isn't possible. If you revalue the constant capital at
>post-production replacement cost, you are valuing inputs and
>outputs simultaneously. You therefore necessarily get the
>well-known simultaneist results:
>
>* Marx was wrong to say that rising productivity brought about by
>mechanization can lower the general rate of profit
>
>* Marx was wrong to say that changes in production conditions in
>luxury industries lead to changes in the general rate of profit
>
>* Marx was wrong to say that variations in output prices do not
>lead to changes in the general rate of profit
>
>etc.
You seem to imply that if an theoretical investigation shows that Marx
might have made a mistake, this is a-priori a reason for rejecting it.
Surely if Sraffa's analysis shows that changes of conditions in luxury
industries do not affect the general rate of profit whereas Marx's assumes
that they do, we have to find some criterion external to these assertions
to judge which is right.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2a24 : Sun Dec 12 1999 - 17:29:14 EST