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.
If been very busy, so unfortunately I haven't been able to keep up my end of the correspondence with various folks. And I'm going to London soon, so I won't be able to get to them for another 2 weeks at least. But I have time for a quick reply to Fred's OPE-L 3458: Fred writes: : 1. Andrew argues (as I understand him) that the value transferred from a : given set of means of production is determined WHEN THESE MEANS OF : PRODUCTION ENTER PRODUCTION. No. I suspect that this is the root of the whole misunderstanding. "WHEN" is *not* the issue. A commodity's value, and thus the value transferred from means of production to it, are *continually* being valued and revalued, because value is determined by the cost of *reproducing* the commodity. The issue is BY WHAT. At any moment, an individual commodity's value, and thus "transferred" component of that value, are determined BY WHAT the value of newly produced commodities of that type happens to be. The value transferred to the newly produced commodities is determined BY WHAT the means of production used up in their production cost when they entered into production. Consider Marx's critique of Ramsay. The value of corn falls in half during the second year. Marx holds that value is determined temporally. Thus the value transferred from seed-corn planted at the *start* of year 2 is £2/qr, while the corn output at the *end* of year 2 is worth £1/qr. That's a FACT. So was Marx guilty of yet another internal inconsistency? Did he violate his theory that value is determined by the labor-time needed to *reproduce* a commodity? Not at all. The definition of constant capital given above by no means excludes the possibility of a change of value in its elements. Stocks of corn still remaining from year 1, worth £2/qr when they were produced, will be worth only £1/qr at the end of year 2. In year 3, new seed-corn entering production will be worth £1/qr, so, once corn produced under these conditions materializes (at the end of year 3), the "transferred" component of the value of any stocks of corn remaining from year 1 or year 2 will now only be worth £1/qr as well. It's that simple. Ciao Andrew Kliman
- [OPE-L:3472] Re: Re: Gil's necessary conditions, (continued)
- [OPE-L:3472] Re: Re: Gil's necessary conditions, Gil Skillman Fri 09 Jun 2000, 16:08 GMT
- [OPE-L:3462] shadow prices, Paul Cockshott Fri 09 Jun 2000, 10:06 GMT
- [OPE-L:3460] Details of Value Theory Symposium 29th and 30th June, Greenwich, Alan Freeman Fri 09 Jun 2000, 09:58 GMT
- [OPE-L:3458] determination of constant capital, Fred B. Moseley Fri 09 Jun 2000, 05:04 GMT
- [OPE-L:3522] Re: determination of constant capital, Andrew_Kliman Tue 20 Jun 2000, 22:04 GMT
- [OPE-L:3530] Re: Re: determination of constant capital, Fred B. Moseley Thu 22 Jun 2000, 19:10 GMT
- [OPE-L:3457] Re: Re: Re: measurement of value, Rakesh Bhandari Fri 09 Jun 2000, 01:18 GMT
- [OPE-L:3459] Re: Re: Re: Re: measurement of value, Paul Cockshott Fri 09 Jun 2000, 09:43 GMT
- [OPE-L:3465] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: measurement of value, Ajit Sinha Fri 09 Jun 2000, 12:04 GMT