Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: : Value talk

["Justin Schwartz" <jkschw@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

> > You still don't get it. Even if there is enough demand takes up 100%
> > of the production, the profitability drops because the stuff can be
> > produced cheaper, but the firms who invested in the
> > oldertechnmologies have these huge sunk costs taht they cannot nake
> > back.
>
> Still don't understand how we move from the difficulties these
> backward firms face to a fall in the average rate of profit for
> capital-as-a-whole.

I don't know wwether the rate of profit does tend to fall. This is a vexed
empirical question. But I can see an argument based on the above that it
might, though it would take some additional assumptions.

> >  A degenerating research program often doesn't have a single fatal flaw.
> > It
> > just runs out of steam, spends all of its time trying to fix up internal
> > problem, doesn't geberate new hypotheses and predictions and theories. I
> > think that is a pretty good description of what has happened in Marxian
> > value theory over the last century.
>
>
> You must realize that this is not an argument but an evaluation that
> comes across as an insult and fighting words.

Well, you can feel insulted if you like, but it's not meant as an insult,
just as an evaluation.

I do think there has
> been progress in reworking official data from a value perspective
> (criticism of wage led profit squeeze thesis carried out by Shaikh
> and Moseley),

I have studied Shaikh's work, and I think some of his criticisms are valid,
but can be expressed without the value theoretic commitments. I'm an
overproductionist a la Brenner myself.

value theoretic analysis of the role of the
> interventionist state (Mattick, deBrunhoff),

I think you overrate Mattick, though he's not bad. I also don't think you
need value theory to say what he says. Fisk's The State and Justice makes
some of the same points without the value theory.

analyses of the world
> market and unequal exchange (Amin, Bettleheim, Sau, Dussel,
> Carchedi),

This stuff I don't know ell.

value based investigations of the labor process (Tony
> Smith),

You left out Braverman. But I think,a gain, that the argumebts do not
require value theory.

attempts to undertand non commodity, fiat and near money
> (Foley, Gansmann),

I don't know this.

attempts to understand share capital (Hilferding,
> Henwood),

Henwood's not a value theorist, are you, Doug?

value based phenomenlogical studies of time (Lukacs,
> Postone),

I know Lukacs inside and out, and I think tahtw hile he is abstractly
commited to the LTV, his analyses do not presuppose value theory at all.

clarification in differences of underconsumption,
> disproportionality and frop crisis theories, development of a theory
> of oil rent and rentier states (Bina).

Don't know this.
> I think Justin is making a strong evaluation without having carefully
> evaluated above work.

Some and some. On the whole, I stand my my claim. A lot of smart people have
used the framework. I don't see that their best work depends on it.

jks


_________________________________________________________________
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx