Re Rakesh's : > Jerry, we can then distinguish between the > continuous depreciation of > unit values and continuous technical change. > The TSS argument only needs the former > for its critique of comparative statics, in > particular the assumption of input > prices=output prices. Hmmm. Suppose that there is a an inter-temporal *appreciation* of the *market price* of certain elements of what become constant circulating capital (inclusive of storage costs). E.g. short to medium-term price increases in oil, gasoline, and derivative energies. Would there then necessarily be under these circumstances, ceteris paribus, a continuous depreciation of unit value? Note how if you include in your measure of the 'depreciation' of unit values the re-valuation of the market price of constant capital, there is thus the perverse possibility that *value* can appreciate over time in the period following sale. Thus, the *value* of the stock of constant capital could increase with time. > But Marx says that he abstracts from > continuous revolutions in value > so he can lay out the moments in the circuit > undisturbed. What exactly is the quote you are referring to? > That is, I > think you have reified an assumption made for > cognitive tractability. What assumption are you referring to? In solidarity, Jerry > Have you ever read Max Webber's The > Vocation of Bookworming? PS: No.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Wed May 02 2001 - 00:00:05 EDT