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.
OK; does this then clarify what I said:
"I argue that the use-value is quantitative in the M--C--M+ circuit, and measured in value units, and the two magnitudes are incommensurable with each other in the sense Marx meant, which was that THE AMOUNT OF VALUE in one plays no role in determining THE AMOUNT OF VALUE in the other."
Of course both have to have value to be compared Jerry, just like two people have to have height to be able to say one is tall and the other short. But the property of both having height of course doesn't determine who is tall or short.
Steve At 07:35 AM 3/22/01 -0500, you wrote:
Re Steve K's [5324]:
> Here we go with "read my lips again". > Jerry, what I said was "one plays no role in determining the other": i.e., > that for strict commodities, the use-value of the commodity plays no role > in determining its EXCHANGE value. You instead read me as saying that > use-value plays no role in determining VALUE. I did not say that!
I don't have to read your lips -- I can read your words. I will capitalize your words below so that you don't miss it.
> > > I argue that use-value is quantitative in the M--C--M+ circuit, and > > > MEASURED IN VALUE UNITS, and the two magnitudes are incommensurable with > > > each other in the sense Marx meant, which was that one plays no role in > > > determining the other *for strict commodities*.
Moreover, lets's follow *exactly* what you say above: if it is true that uv and ev are both "measured in value units", then it can not also follow that uv and ev play no role in determining each other for 'strict commodities'. I.e. if there is no uv, then there can be no value and HENCE no ev for the 'commodity'. Thus, whether a commodity contains uv is a necessary precondition for the the product to actually have value *and ev* and thereby actually be a commodity. And that follows necessarily -- word for word -- from what you wrote above.
In solidarity, Jerry
Dr. Steve Keen Senior Lecturer Economics & Finance Campbelltown, Building 11 Room 30, School of Economics and Finance UNIVERSITY WESTERN SYDNEY LOCKED BAG 1797 PENRITH SOUTH DC NSW 1797 Australia s.keen@xxxxxxxxxx 61 2 4620-3016 Fax 61 2 4626-6683 Home 02 9558-8018 Mobile 0409 716 088 Home Page: http://bus.uws.edu.au/steve-keen/
- [OPE-L:5229] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: RE: RE: Re: [Mike W] Re: use-value as quantitative, (continued)
- [OPE-L:5229] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: RE: RE: Re: [Mike W] Re: use-value as quantitative, Steve Keen Thu 22 Mar 2001, 06:43 GMT
- [OPE-L:5232] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: RE: RE: Re: [Mike W] Re: use-value as quantitative, Gerald_A_Levy Thu 22 Mar 2001, 11:21 GMT
- [OPE-L:5234] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: RE: RE: Re: [Mike W] Re: use-value as quantitative, Steve Keen Thu 22 Mar 2001, 11:57 GMT
- [OPE-L:5236] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: RE: RE: Re: [Mike W] Re: use-value as quantitative, Gerald_A_Levy Thu 22 Mar 2001, 12:33 GMT
- [OPE-L:5243] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: RE: RE: Re: [Mike W] Re: use-value as quantitative, Steve Keen Fri 23 Mar 2001, 22:21 GMT
- [OPE-L:5222] Re: An Introduction to Marx's 'Capital' out of India, Paul Zarembka Wed 21 Mar 2001, 16:52 GMT
- [OPE-L:5219] Response to Andy Brown: Marx's and Marxian Paradigms, Nicola Taylor Wed 21 Mar 2001, 02:32 GMT
- [OPE-L:5220] Re: Response to Andy Brown: Marx's and Marxian Paradigms, Nicola Taylor Wed 21 Mar 2001, 03:32 GMT
- [OPE-L:5215] Re: Re: Re: waste, value, and potential, glevy Tue 20 Mar 2001, 17:54 GMT