[OPE-L:4019] The Transformation Non-Problem and the Non-Transformation Problem

From: Alejandro Ramos (aramos@btl.net)
Date: Sun Oct 08 2000 - 16:42:19 EDT

Re Andrew K #4017:

You write:

>That is the key question of all quantitative value theory of whatever
>stripe (neoclassical, post-Keynesian, Sraffian, etc.), IMHO.  The answer
>depends on the theory in question.  P[t] is given BEFORE production, and
>let's assume A and B are given.  Then either the P[t+1] are determined
>exogenously (e.g., by "demand," as in PK theory) which then determines r;
>or r is determined exogenously, which then determines the P[t+1].



>So what?  What is the justification for holding the matrix of
>technological and real wage coefficients, A, constant over time?

I think it's implicitly assumed the existence of some kind of "Walrasian
auctionner" who solves the system *atemporally* in such a way that input
and output prices are the same. Market is then conceived as a kind of
"computer" searching for equilibrium given some parameters. Additionally,
it sounds pretty "materialistic" to use technology and real wage as the
parameters used to determine prices.


This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Oct 31 2000 - 00:00:09 EST