IMPORTANT: If you cite this message, OPE-L policy requires you not to reveal the identity of the author.
You may cite this message only if you do not disclose who wrote it.
> >From your statement it is not clear how you figure the process which you > call comparison of values. The exchange between a commodity and the money > commodity provides the exchange value. Marx called value to what underlies > the exchange value > and represents amounts of abstract labor. The exchange value is a mere > quantitative relation between an ordinary commodity and another commodity, > singled out of the universe of commodities as a general equivalent of > value. Now, what we call value cannot be explained taking value as a factor > of the explanation. The point then is: what is it that causes each > commodity to be exchanged against a given amount of the equivalent > commodity? It's not value, because value is the result of the process, > value is the name we give to the amount of the equivalent commodity given > in exchange for an ordinary commodity. What you have described there is not the value of a commodity but what marx represents as its price, its exchange value in terms of the universal equivalent gold. > But what makes them compare to each > other according to equal amounts of social labor? This is the point about > which I > have attempted to present my understanding. This is indeed a hard question, why are prices proportional to values. As you say in a commodity producing society the division of social labour is regulated through prices, which can only be done if there is a strong correlation between prices and values. But this does not answer the question. Since prices are not in practice weights of gold, but abstract units of account created by the state, one needs some mechanism that establishes a correlation between these abstract units of account and social labour. The state theory of money does this by saying that the state appropriates a share of the social labour time. It appropriates this from a subset of the population - the state employees and suppliers of commodities to the state. This subset is issued with credit accounts with the central bank for these services. When I do work for the civil service I am given a cheque drawn not on a bank but on the state itself ( I think it says it is drawn against the 'lord treasurer's remebrancer'). I take this to a bank and they cash it for me into pound notes which, unlike the cheque are freely transferable. Later in the year I am sent a tax demand saying that I must pay a certain sum by Jan 31st or face immediate and automatic penalties. Along with the tax demand comes a paying in slip stating that the payment must be made into the inland revenue general account at the bank of England. The payment has to be made via my bank. My bank, and the other clearing banks clear these debits to the Bank of England, by tendering the cheques issued against the Lord Treasurers Remembrancer, or with notes issued by the Bank of England. So long as the issue of cheques by the Lord Treasurers Remembrancer balances the payments into the Inland Revenue General account, the value of money is fixed by the following formula value of 1 pound = Hours labour appropriated by the state/ Number of pounds issued in return
- [OPE-L:2079] Re: Re: the nature of a commodity and the meaning of class struggle, (continued)
- [OPE-L:2079] Re: Re: the nature of a commodity and the meaning of class struggle, Jurriaan Bendien Mon 10 Jan 2000, 17:07 GMT
- [OPE-L:2041] The Money Supply, chaion lee Thu 06 Jan 2000, 02:24 GMT
- [OPE-L:2040] The Money Supply, chaion lee Thu 06 Jan 2000, 02:15 GMT
- [OPE-L:2039] Re: Re: the money supply, Claus Germer Wed 05 Jan 2000, 19:07 GMT
- [OPE-L:2042] Re: Re: Re: the money supply, clyder Thu 06 Jan 2000, 11:34 GMT
- [OPE-L:2043] Re: Re: gold, Jurriaan Bendien Thu 06 Jan 2000, 13:06 GMT
- [OPE-L:2045] Re: Re: Re: gold, clyder Thu 06 Jan 2000, 14:38 GMT
- [OPE-L:2057] Re: Re: Re: gold, Duncan K. Foley Sat 08 Jan 2000, 04:51 GMT
- [OPE-L:2061] Re: Re: Re: Re: gold, coslap Sat 08 Jan 2000, 17:51 GMT