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



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


Hi Jerry

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.)

I don't think it is about the aggregate. TSS takes the value of constant capital at the disaggregated level as equal to its nominal cost divided by the MELT. TSS does not assume that the value of commodity capital is equal to the nominal price it sells for divided by the appropriate MELT. It accepts that there is a price-value deviation here. I do not, of course.


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.).

Value = price is not an assumption. It is a necessity. No unfolding can undo it. Universal equivalent.


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

Yes, provided the crazies don't cancel the flight. Alan Freeman is responding to Veneziani and Mohun on the MELT and the FMT.

Phil



Other Periods  | Other mailing lists  | Search  ]