[OPE-L:3712] Re: Re: Fred M.'s interpretation

From: Andrew Brown (Andrew@lubs.leeds.ac.uk)
Date: Wed Aug 23 2000 - 12:42:44 EDT

[ show plain text ]

Hi Fred,

Your reply did help. Slowly, I think I am beginning to grasp what is
going on!

One point of clarification (which will probably reveal more of my

you stated on your earlier 3697:

Marx divided the initial M into two theoretically significant 
components: constant capital and variable capital (i.e M  =  C + V). 
 Since the initial M is taken as given, so are its two components (C 
and V). Constant capital is the component of M that is affected by 
capital gains and losses. Therefore, the constant capital that is 
taken as given is the adjusted constant capital (i.e. the constant 
capital in current costs).   

You later post implied, I think, that V is *also* adjusted. This would seem to be necessary if V is the same before and after the transformation, as you say is the case in your later post. On the other hand, is this adjustment of V justified on your 'capital gains' argument?

Does your published work refer to the 'capital gains' argument?

Many thanks,


This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Aug 31 2000 - 00:00:04 EDT