[OPE-L:3589] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: money-capital as initial givens

[Gil Skillman <gskillman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Fred, I downloaded one of your papers, thanks, but I couldn't access the
one labelled something like "New solution"--is that just a copy of the
article that appears in the very latest RRPE?  If so I can read it there.  Gil
>
>Hi Gil,
>
>Thanks for your request.  Attached to this message are three papers in
>which I discuss Marx's key premiss of the prior determination of the
>total amount of surplus-value for the economy as a whole.  I would of
>course be very interested in your comments.
>
>I look forward to resuming our discussion later in the summer.
>
>Comradely,
>Fred
>
>
>
>
>On Fri, 7 Jul 2000, Gil Skillman wrote:
>
>> Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2000 11:14:55 -0400
>> From: Gil Skillman <gskillman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Reply-To: ope-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> To: ope-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Subject: [OPE-L:3574] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: money-capital as initial  givens
>>
>> Fred, I don't really understand this point.  I know you're busy now, but
>> could you direct me to a particular paper in which you develop this
>> argument?  Thanks, Gil
>>
>> >There is no contradiction between equations (2) and (4) if equation (2) is
>> >understood to apply to the economy as a whole (i.e. to capital in
>> >general), as I have argued in several papers.  Equation (2) (or an
>> >equation similar to it in my papers) determines the total amount of
>> >surplus-value and the rate of profit, which then is taken as given in
>> >the determination of individual prices of production in equation (4).
>> >
>> >Comradely,
>> >Fred
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
>