[OPE-L:5183] Re: Re: Re: the transfer and depreciation of the value of means of production

From: Steve Keen (s.keen@uws.edu.au)
Date: Fri Mar 16 2001 - 00:25:54 EST

Quite willing to at a later date Jerry, but only if you state whether you 
accept my argument that in Marx's theory of value, use-value can be 
quantitative. If you don't accept that--on the basis of my previous post 
(and all previous relevant ones! -:>), then there's no point discussing it 
further: we'll simply be arguing past each other, with you believing that 
use-value must be qualitative and hence dismissing my arguments.

At 10:43 PM 3/15/01 -0500, you wrote:
>Re Steve K's [5179]:
>The discussion with John was informative--in fact, John spotted the 
>numerical example which I had missed in my first reading of the 
>Grundrisse. But it failed to satisfy me for the same reason that your 
>comment fails to satisfy me, in that John would not accept the contention 
>that use-value could be quantitative.
>*What is the unit of measurement, then, of use-
>value? How is its magnitude measured?*
>Far from being inconsistent with Marx's perspective on the creation of 
>value, it is integral to it: in the case of inputs to production, 
>use-value is *quantitative*, not qualitative. This is precisely the manner 
>in which he derives the result that labor-power is a source of 
>surplus-value in Capital:
>*Labor time can be measured -- even though it
>gets tricky because what is being measured
>is *socially necessary labor time* rather than
>just labor time. If use value, you emphasize,
>is quantitative then h-o-w is it measured?*
><snip, JL>
>in general, your statement above is an accurate statement of what Marx 
>claimed. However, it is *not* true of that one example I gave: there Marx 
>did quite explicitly--in his use-value/exchange-value language linked to 
>the issue of the *difference* between value creation and 
>depreciation--consider that the value transferred to output by a machine 
>could be greater than the value it contains: "It also has to be postulated 
>(which was not done above) that the use-value of the machine significantly 
>greater than its value; i.e. that its devaluation in the service of 
>production is not proportional to its increasing effect on production."
>*Alas, you did not take up my challenge to defend
>that interpretation by placing it +within the context+
>of the examples and paragraphs preceeding and
>following the quote.*
>In solidarity, Jerry

Dr. Steve Keen
Senior Lecturer
Economics & Finance
Campbelltown, Building 11 Room 30,
School of Economics and Finance
s.keen@uws.edu.au 61 2 4620-3016 Fax 61 2 4626-6683
Home 02 9558-8018 Mobile 0409 716 088
Home Page: http://bus.macarthur.uws.edu.au/steve-keen/

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon Apr 02 2001 - 09:57:29 EDT