[OPE-L:4029] RE: Re: RE: Re: transforming the inputs (was no subject)

From: Chai-on Lee (conlee@chonnam.ac.kr)
Date: Mon Oct 09 2000 - 09:57:08 EDT

Dear Allin,

Because the v and the s are just two partitions of a single entity produced by the direct labor, I think, the two parts should be valued in the same terms. In measuring our heights, we should not one part of our body (below waist) in terms of yard and the other ppart of our body in terms of meter, and adding the two figures. They measure the one part of direct labor ("v") in terms of prpr and the other part of the direct labor in terms of laboe value, and just adding the two distinct terms to make the magnitude of newly produced value. This must be a nonsense. 

If we are in the context of price of production, the v and the profit are two distinct entities and so could be valued in different terms. The agent of production differs in the two cases. One is direct labor of v and s, the other is the capital value of v and c. 

Then, the figures of the commodity values will change in the result. I should say that the caliberation of the labor measurement has changed because the direct labor units are changed as we have measured the v in different terms.

How do you think?



-----Original Message-----
From: owner-ope-l@galaxy.csuchico.edu [mailto:owner-ope-l@galaxy.csuchico.edu]On Behalf Of Allin Cottrell
Sent: Monday, October 09, 2000 10:49 AM
To: ope-l@galaxy.csuchico.edu
Subject: [OPE-L:4021] Re: RE: Re: transforming the inputs (was no subject)

On Mon, 9 Oct 2000, Chai-on Lee wrote:

> In your iteration, why is the rate of exploitation allowed
> to change in the iterative transformation? Firstly, the rate
> of exploitation should not vary in such operations.
> Secondly, both the numerator and the denomenator in the
> exploitation rate should be valued in the same terms, either
> in the common value terms or in the common pr terms.

Since v is being revalued in terms of prices of production at
each step, holding (s/v) constant would mean changing the figure
for s, thus breaking the equality of total profit and total
surplus value.  I wanted to maintain at least one of Marx's
equalities.  How would you say the iteration ought to go?


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