Re: [OPE-L] Ricardo and Marx on embodiment

[Gerald_A_Levy@xxxxxxx]

>  Such a reading tens towards an ahistorical concept of

> value, and necessarily involves the consequence that the inefficient

> worker produces more valuable commodities than the efficient one;

> and hence the formation of a social value determined by SNLT must

> mean a transfer of value.

 

Hi Chris:

 

Why, from the perspective that you are critiquing, would an inefficient

worker "necessarily" produce more valuable commodities than an

efficient one?

 

Where it is claimed that there is a transfer of value, isn't the value

re-distributed from the least efficient capitals to the more efficient ones?

Isn't the more "efficient" worker, to the extent that the efficiency

arises from an increase in the productivity of labour and the

production of relative surplus value, generally employed by the

more advanced capitalists?

 

In solidarity, Jerry