Drewk wrote:
However, properly understood, the law of value does generate a falsifiable hypothesis that has not been falsified: productivity increases tend to reduce commodities' prices. My preliminary computation for the US during the past 1/2 century indicates that a 1 percentage point increase in multifactor productivity leads, ceteris paribus, to almost exactly a 1 percentage point decline in the CPI.
Three questions:
1) Would bourgeois economists disagree that higher productivity means lower prices? That's Wall Street common sense for sure; what about the higher economics?
2) Why have prices increased over the long term despite constant increases in productivity?
3) Why do value theorists find it harder to agree among themselves than do bourgeois economists?
Doug
- As, (continued)
- As, MIYACHI Fri 13 Jun 2003, 20:11 GMT
- Re: Falsifiability and the law of value, andie nachgeborenen Fri 13 Jun 2003, 15:22 GMT
- Re: Falsifiability and the law of value, Ian Murray Fri 13 Jun 2003, 15:40 GMT
- Re: Falsifiability and the law of value, Drewk Fri 13 Jun 2003, 20:25 GMT
- Re: Falsifiability and the law of value, Doug Henwood Fri 13 Jun 2003, 20:32 GMT
- Re: Falsifiability and the law of value, Bill Lear Fri 13 Jun 2003, 20:48 GMT
- Re: Falsifiability and the law of value, Doug Henwood Fri 13 Jun 2003, 20:57 GMT
- Re: Falsifiability and the law of value, Drewk Fri 13 Jun 2003, 21:09 GMT
- Re: Falsifiability and the law of value, Devine, James Fri 13 Jun 2003, 14:30 GMT