(OPE-L) Re: Roberto Veneziani article on TSS

[gerald_a_levy <gerald_a_levy@xxxxxxx>]

http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/links/doi/10.1111/j.0026-1386.2004.00184.x/
abs/

 Hi Phil.

 > From the abstract:
> "Marx's propositions on value and exploitation are tautologically obtained
> (i) by constructing a money costs theory of value, where by assumption
values
> are  equal to market prices ..."
> I cannot see that as a defect.

It's not a defect to _assume_ that (in the aggregate) commodity values
equal market prices _if_ that can later be shown to be a  (legitimate)
_result_  (logical unfolding) of the analysis rather than merely a
presumption.
(the previous sentence is in response to your comment, not the article by
Veneziani or any TSS authors.)

This is a methodological imperative.  In the assumption of value = price
there is  unity (simple unity).  Yet,  there is a systematic divergence of
individual values from market prices (diversity) that, in Marx's theory,
leads to the concept of prices of production (unity-in-diversity).   Of
course, whether this is satisfactorily achieved in Marx's theory is a
subject that has been debated  _ad nauseum_,  but the point that I'm
making here (having to do with  assumptions and 'givens')  is a
methodological one related to the unfolding and ordering of the
analysis in  a systematic dialectical presentation of the bourgeois mode
of production. (Jeez ... I'm beginning to sound like an amalgam of
Mike W and Tony S.).

 Are you going to the EEA conference in D.C. this year?

 In solidarity, Jerry