Re: [OPE-L] questions on the interpretation of labour values

[Allin Cottrell <cottrell@xxxxxxx>]

On Sat, 24 Mar 2007, Rakesh Bhandari wrote:

> Modern equilibrium economists, Marxist included, have read Marx
> as admitting that he needed to transform his inputs into the
> same prices of production as his outputs. But Marx never said
> that he should have and failed to transform his inputs into the
> same prices of production as his outputs.

Then what the heck did Marx mean when he wrote,

"Since the price of production may differ from the value of a
commodity, it follows that the cost-price of a commodity
containing this price of production of another commodity may also
stand above or below that portion of its total value derived from
the value of the means of production consumed by it. It is
necessary to remember this modified significance of the
cost-price, and to bear in mind that there is always the
possibility of an error if the cost-price of a commodity in any
particular sphere is identified with the value of the means of
production consumed by it."

It seems to me that either (a) this is just mumbo-jumbo, or (b) it
means that Marx "admitted that he needed to transform his inputs".
(Given, of course, the counterfactual maintained hypothesis of a
single general rate of profit.)

Allin Cottrell