OPE-L
mailing list archive
[ Other Periods  | Other mailing lists  | Search  ]
Date:  [ Previous  | Next  ]      Thread:  [ Previous  | Next  ]      Index:  [ Author  | Date  | Thread  ]

IMPORTANT: If you cite this message, OPE-L policy requires you not to reveal the identity of the author.

Re: is value labour?

You may cite this message only if you do not disclose who wrote it. 

Alfredo,

Are you arguing that Marx's 'value' is therefore different than Ricardo's
'value' and, if so [if not different, I wouldn't understand your point],
how different?  It is one thing to mention that Ricardo speaks from a
trans-historical position but not Marx, it is another to demonstrate how
'value' is thus affected.

Paul

--On Wednesday, May 07, 2003 9:45 AM -0400 Asfilho@xxxxxxx wrote:

The trouble with such Ricardian views as "value is labour" is that they
take for granted the existence of exchange, prices and commodities. That
commodities are worth more because they embody more labour begs the
questions of *why there are commodities at all*, and *why it is a
relevant abstraction to assume, at certain stages in the analysis, that
commodities exchange at their labour time of production*.

[ Other Periods  | Other mailing lists  | Search  ]