[OPE-L:5055] Re: Re: Re: Comments on 3 recent debates

From: Rakesh Narpat Bhandari (rakeshb@Stanford.EDU)
Date: Fri Feb 23 2001 - 13:31:21 EST

re 5051

>On Thu, 22 Feb 2001, Fred B. Moseley wrote:
>>  Andrew's short-run equilibrium prices of production change from
>>  period to period, even though there is no change in productivity.
>>  I think this is contrary to Marx's prices of production, which are
>>  the long-run equilibrium prices at the end of the adjustment
>>  process, and change only due to changes in productivity.
>>  What do you think?
>I think that if one says "Changes in E are due solely to changes in
>C", in a context where lagged adjustment may occur, this should be
>taken to mean
>   All changes in E can be ascribed or traced back to current or
>   prior changes in C
>which does not imply
>   You'll never see a slice of time in which E changes but C does
>   not
>[N.B., I'm not actually defending Andrew's concept of prices of
>production; I'm just suggesting that the sort of quotation you have
>brought forward doesn't settle the matter.]

In contradiction to what I said before, Marx does allow a strong 
demand shift to change market value and by implication price of 
production in the next chapter, ch 10, vol III. That is,  a strong 
demand shift may cause a high or low cost producer to now determine 
the value of a commodity. In this case changes in E would then 
ultimately be traced back not to not C but D.


This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Mar 01 2001 - 14:01:40 EST