From: Paul Bullock (paulbullock@EBMS-LTD.CO.UK)
Date: Thu Jul 15 2004 - 18:19:32 EDT
Jurriaan FYI Soros and co are only into basic materials, gold and swiss francs ( 40% backed by gold still) at the moment.Why?... they think the dollar is due for a worse bashing in 2005/6. Your comment is contradictory... you say a commodity theory of money can't be sustained, but when a crisis breaks out we are back with it. The point is that Marx proposed an understanding of fiduciary issue, credit and so on from the basis of the money commodity, money of the world, base gold etc..and quite apart from the fact that the petty beourgoeois economist can't bare the thought of being equated with the unskilled gold panner or despoiled mine worker, the money commodity is the social expression of the abstraction by capital of all specific and concrete skills of labour and the recognition of its homogeneous quality as human labour specifically used for capital's self expansion . Best regards paul bullock. ----- Original Message ----- From: <glevy@PRATT.EDU> To: <OPE-L@SUS.CSUCHICO.EDU> Sent: Thursday, July 15, 2004 7:45 PM Subject: [OPE-L] (OPE-L) Monetary economics > ---------------------------- Original Message ---------------------------- > Subject: Monetary economics > From: "Jurriaan Bendien" <andromeda246@hetnet.nl> > Date: Tue, July 13, 2004 1:16 pm > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Although I haven't been able to study these issues about money in depth as > I would like, I might pass on some useful sites for references on the role > of money which I found on a query surfing the net, which may be useful to > interested Marxian economists: > > http://www.economics.ltsn.ac.uk/books/MonetaryEconomics.htm#0333725441 > http://www.consult.hyperion.co.uk/PubWebFiles/DigMon03/FutureofMoney.pdf > http://dismalscience.narod.ru/Ec_fin.htm > http://www.umass.edu/peri/ > > Monetary economics in the Marxian tradition was dealt with by Suzanne de > Brunhoff, Duncan Foley, Makoto Itoh/Costas Lapavitsas, and Laurence > Harris. I personally don't think a "commodity theory of money" can be > credibly sustained these days, other than as a special theory, or with > many qualifications. Particularly in a contemporary setting, monetary > phenomena obviously cannot really be understood separately from the supply > of credit. More than ever before the monetary system has become a way of > asserting claims on the social surplus product. I think though one of the > best ways to study the economic role of money, though, is to study what > happens to exchange relations in the case when a monetary regime breaks > down, or a currency is debased or destabilised. In that case, we are > pretty soon back with a Marxian-type view of the essence of money. > > A very succinct, readable Marxian article on contemporary monetarist > ideologies which I found useful as a student was by Ernest Mandel, "World > crisis and the monetarist answer", in Karel Jansen (ed), Monetarism, > economic crisis and the Third World. London: Frank Cass, 1983. This book > also has some other useful articles. > > Jurriaan >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Jul 17 2004 - 00:00:01 EDT