PEN-L
mailing list archive
[ Other Periods
| Other mailing lists
| Search
]
Date:
[ Previous
| Next
]
Thread:
[ Previous
| Next
]
Index:
[ Author
| Date
| Thread
]
Re: Law of value
Paul Cockshott is absolutiely right (sorry about the typos). Marx
uses the phrase "law of value" and the word "law" in general in
a different sense than scientists do. My impression is that he
used the phrase "law of value" a lot and used the "labor theory of
value" to refer to Ricardo's work -- but I'm willing to be conveinced
by textual evidence. As far as I can tell, for Marx, "law" is
equivalent to "principal" (as when teh old Bolsheviks referred
to the "law" of uneven and combined development).
I only use the phrase "law of value" to distinguish what I see
as Marx's theory from the usual interpretation (values as a price
theory). Mike Lebowitz's "MTV" may be better.
Either one seems more memorable than "interpretation 1-A" vs.
"interpretation 3-b" and the like.
in pen-l solidarity,
Jim Devine BITNET: jndf@lmuacad INTERNET: jdevine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Econ. Dept., Loyola Marymount Univ., Los Angeles, CA 90045-2699 USA
310/338-2948 (off); 310/202-6546 (hm); FAX: 310/338-1950
- Thread context:
- LTV and 97%,
Paul Cockshott Fri 25 Mar 1994, 22:17 GMT
- Basic income proposal,
Paul Cockshott Fri 25 Mar 1994, 21:52 GMT
- Labour or Land theory of value,
Paul Cockshott Fri 25 Mar 1994, 20:16 GMT
- Law of value,
Paul Cockshott Fri 25 Mar 1994, 20:00 GMT
- <Possible follow-up(s)>
- Re: Law of value,
Jim Devine Sat 26 Mar 1994, 04:20 GMT
- RE: Law of value,
Michael Lebowitz Sat 26 Mar 1994, 10:24 GMT
- Law of value,
Paul Cockshott Mon 28 Mar 1994, 20:39 GMT
- Re: Law of value,
Jim Devine Mon 28 Mar 1994, 21:21 GMT
- Law of value,
Paul Cockshott Thu 31 Mar 1994, 20:39 GMT
[ Other Periods
| Other mailing lists
| Search
]