[OPE-L:3345] Re: Re: Re: Re: starting points [can surplus value be measured?]

From: Patrick L. Mason (pmason@garnet.acns.fsu.edu)
Date: Thu May 25 2000 - 12:28:36 EDT

[ show plain text ]

Ajit writes,

"If value is not quantifiable in principle, then, of course, Marx's concept
of value and surplus value turn out to be nothing but gebrish--there cannot
be any escape from this conclusion."

Succinct. Correct.

No need to argue about 2nd order practical problems if one reduces Marx to

peace, patrick

At 05:21 PM 5/25/00 +0530, you wrote:
>Michael Perelman wrote:
>> I have long been convinced that value cannot be precisely measured.
>There are two issues involved here. (1) Whether the concept of value is a
>quantitative concept, i.e. it is idealy measurable in principle, and (2)
>it is practically measurable in statistical sense. Now, my position is mainly
>concerned with the first point. If value is not quantifiable in principle,
>of course, Marx's concept of value and surplus value turn out to be
nothing but
>gebrish--there cannot be any escape from this conclusion. However, one can
>that there are theoretical problems regarding reduction of skilled to
>labor as well as quantifying depreciations in case of fixed capital. In this
>case, all should at least agree that under the assumption that all labor is
>unskilled labor and that there are no fixed capital, value as a quantitative
>concept has no problem. Then one can think about solving the second order
>problems. But to say that value is a "qualitative" concept and not a
>"quantitative" concept is to practically declare most of Marx's *Capital*
>gebrish. Cheers, ajit sinha
>> I gave my clearerst analysis in "Marx, Devalorisation, and the Theory of
>> Value." Cambridge Journal of Economics, 23: 6 (November): pp. 719-28.
>> Also, earlier in Karl Marx's Crisis Theory: Labor, Scarcity and Fictitious
>> Capital (New York: Praeger, 1987).
>> 1993. "The Qualitative Side of Marx's Value Theory." Rethinking Marxism,
>> 6, No. 1 (Spring): pp. 82-95.
>> 1991. "The Phenomenology of Constant Capital and Fictitious Capital."
>> of Radical Political Economy, Vol. 22, Nos. 2 & 3 (Summer and Fall): pp.
>> 66-91.
>> Besides the problem of objectively measuring abstract labor, the
>> of long-lived constant capital is incapable of measurement unless you
know in
>> advance when that capital will be replaced.
>> --
>> Michael Perelman
>> Economics Department
>> California State University
>> Chico, CA 95929
>> Tel. 530-898-5321
>> E-Mail michael@ecst.csuchico.edu

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed May 31 2000 - 00:00:12 EDT