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

[Pen-L Fred Moseley <fmoseley@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Quoting ajit sinha <sinha_a99@xxxxxxxxx>:

> --- Pen-L Fred Moseley <fmoseley@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > I don?t understand this argument, which you repeat
> > several times.
> > Which capital goods are you thinking about that are
> > inputs to many
> > industries in general?  Oil?  It seems to me that
> > most capital goods
> > are quite industry specific, and are used in only
> > one industry, or a
> > small group of industries.  If so, then changes in
> > the values of
> > capital goods do not have a general effect on the
> > values of many final
> > goods, as you suggest.
> -------------------------------
> Fred, I agree with most of what you say about Marx's
> prices of production and the classical natural prices.
> However, your above statement is flat out wrong. If
> there is technical change in any capital goods sector,
> the values of all the goods must change. That
> particular capital good does not have to physically
> inter the production of every commodity. But it does
> inter them indirectly since a capital good by
> definition is a basic good. Cheers, ajit sinha


Ajit, what about capital goods used only for the production
of non-basic goods?

The further removed a capital good is from the production of
a given final good, the less effect a change in the value of
the capital good will have on the price of production of the
final good.  The most significant causes, by far, of a change in the
price of production of a final good is a change in its
own value, or a change in the value of capital goods which enter
directly into the production of the final good.

Comradely,
Fred

----------------------------------------------------------------
This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.