[OPE-L:3686] Re: Re: Re: textual evidence [or what are you reading?]

From: Fred B. Moseley (fmoseley@mtholyoke.edu)
Date: Thu Aug 17 2000 - 09:01:09 EDT

[ show plain text ]

On Wed, 16 Aug 2000, Paul Zarembka wrote:
> "Fred B. Moseley" <fmoseley@mtholyoke.edu> said, on 08/16/00:
> >In this chapter, Marx did indeed define constant capital as the "money
> >laid out for means of production." (p. 317).
> p. 317 has no such phrase in my Fowkes edition and, in fact, the word
> "money" does not even appear on that page anywhere (I checked twice -- am
> I blind?).
> The page rather says "I call [that part of capital which is turned into
> means of production] the constant part of capital, or more briefly,
> constant capital."
> See provide the exact edition of Marx you are using, Fred, if not the
> Vintage/Random House 1977.
> Thanks, Paul

Hi Paul,

You are right. Marx said the "capital that is turned into means of
production." But capital has been defined as money, and what else is
turned into, or exchanged for, means of production besides money?


This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Aug 31 2000 - 00:00:03 EDT