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.
Hi Rakesh, One thing to do would be to consider from what respective perspectives(individual commodity, system-wide, all possible?) our respective viewpoints are coming from. The most important aspect I have been apparantly abysmally failing to get across is the importance of distinguishing between persepctives, in particular system-wide vs. individual. Your replies seem simply never to have engaged me on this. Yes - I am frustrated! Let's put it another way - in 'what sense' can we say a commodity is not a value prior to sale? No sense at all? In what sense can we say it is? Many thanks, Andy AM +0100 10/20/05, Andrew Brown wrote: >Hi Rakesh, > >You wrote 'But dispositional ev is then only potential ev'. > >Correct. My point is that potential exchange value is (an) actual >(form of) value. And of course I think potential exchange value is a potential form of value. > Value and exchange value are not the same. Agreed. > >Does this make any sense? Of course it does, I'm just not persuaded. And neither you by me. What to do? I am willing to move on. yours, r > >Andy
- Re: [OPE-L] Capital in General, (continued)
- Re: [OPE-L] Capital in General, Andrew Brown Wed 19 Oct 2005, 23:23 GMT
- Re: [OPE-L] Capital in General, Rakesh Bhandari Thu 20 Oct 2005, 01:21 GMT
- Re: [OPE-L] Capital in General, Rakesh Bhandari Thu 20 Oct 2005, 01:18 GMT
- Re: [OPE-L] Capital in General, Jerry Levy Thu 20 Oct 2005, 01:19 GMT
- Re: [OPE-L] Capital in General, Andrew Brown Thu 20 Oct 2005, 06:36 GMT
- Re: [OPE-L] Capital in General, Christopher Arthur Thu 20 Oct 2005, 10:15 GMT
- Re: [OPE-L] Capital in General, Rakesh Bhandari Thu 20 Oct 2005, 12:01 GMT
- Re: [OPE-L] Capital in General, Andrew Brown Thu 20 Oct 2005, 13:13 GMT
- Re: [OPE-L] Capital in General, Rakesh Bhandari Thu 20 Oct 2005, 15:17 GMT