[OPE-L:4472] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: what is Volume 1 about?

From: Rakesh Narpat Bhandari (rakeshb@Stanford.EDU)
Date: Mon Nov 06 2000 - 17:00:10 EST

re 4466
>My time is really scarce so only a brief comment on your #4464:

OK, Alejandro, I'll make a brief point in which I think you will be interested

>  Or, do you think that
>capital is advanced as a *labor-time* magnitude? (this is not a rethoric

Of course not.

>If you are producing yarn under the average conditions and you advance $500
>in cotton representing 500 hours of past labor, this is the amount of
>*labor time* which enters in the *value* of yarn, no matter if the labor
>time objectified in this cotton during the past production cycle is 400
>hours. The part of the social cost corresponding to the new cotton to be
>produced is what effectively capitalist pay for it at the beginning of the
>circuit. This is the "past labor" transferred during the subsequent
>produciton process.

No way!

Divide the world into machine producers and machine users. If the 
former sells above value due to some combination of the equalisation 
of profit rates and monopoly power, the machine users have simply 
paid a higher price than will be transferred by labor from these 
means to the final product. In essence, surplus value has been 
distributed upfront to the machine maker.

  If the price the machine users paid equalled the value which is 
transferred by labor from these machines, then their profits would 
not suffer.

Under your interpretation,  a crucial mechanism of global inequality 
is thus obscured.

comradely, r

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Nov 30 2000 - 00:00:05 EST