[OPE-L:4060] RE: Revaluation

From: John Ernst (ernst@pipeline.com)
Date: Thu Oct 12 2000 - 11:14:45 EDT

At 03:53 PM 10/12/2000 +0100, you wrote:
>John wrote [#4057]
>> In OPE-L 4056,  Andrew wrote:
>> "Inputs and stocks are two different things.  Inputs are things that 
>> have been used up, no longer exist, whereas stocks are still in
>> existence."
>> I think there is a question of how we look at things here.  For example, 
>> if a capitalist has $100 worth of stock at beginning of production and
>> that stock is worth $50 at the end of the period,  has not $50 of stock
>> been "used up"?   Must we look at physical units involved to determine
>> the value "used up:?
>	It seems we must, or your point wouldn't be understandable, since I
>take it that when you refer to "that stock" you refer to physical items.
>	If you instead mean the $100, then from your formulation we cannot
>tell whether the $50 missing at the end has been used up *in production*, or
>whether it has evaporated due to moral depreciation, accidental loss, etc.
>	In the latter case, $50 may indeed have been "used up" in some
>sense, but not as an input to production, which is what Andrew was referring
>	Julian


You then face the problem of how to account for the missing $50.  Further,
you seem to take the position that one type of depreciation transfers
value to the output and the other type does not.  I think you then face
the question of why moral depreciation is to be labeled "depreciation" at


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