[OPE-L:7044] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Marxist economics?

From: Diego (diego.guerrero@cps.ucm.es)
Date: Mon Apr 22 2002 - 12:28:10 EDT

<<Dear Diego, I think you are throwing too much on the list. Too much good stuff, by the way. I think we have to develop one issue at a time. For instance: what are the arguments of Brody's regarding the value of labor power? Is there any empirical work attached to his analysis? What's the reference? This would make for a more substantive discussion. Jerry will certainly organize this debate so as to draw the most out of it. 
Paulo Cipolla >>

I think Brody says: 

There is no problem at all with the different kinds of labor. If it is true that in the aggregate the value of labor power is the value of the means of consumption needed to reproduce labor power, it will also be true at the disaggregate level. If we know how much society needs for reproducing each of the m types of labor, all we need is to build a (n+m) x (n+m) input matrix (including n commodities and m types of labour). The (n+m) relevant eigenvector will give us the n+m prices (or if you like, the n prices and the m coefficients of conversion of the different types of labor to the one single labor). Now, you may have two different magnitudes (I wish to thank Manuel Muiņos here) for each of the elements in this price (value) vector:

a) if you are using direct prices or values (starting from a common rate of surplus value), you get prices or values proportional to the *spent* quantities of labor (*spent* at the sectoral level of abstraction)

b) if you write production prices or values (starting from a common rate of profit), you get prices or values which deviates from the former according to the magnitude of their sectoral vcc relative to the average vcc, ie, prices or values proportional to the *spent* quantities of labor (but *spent* at the inter-sectoral level of abstraction).

As philophers and mathematicians specialized in measuring know (please recall the excellent Heiner Ganssmann 1988 HOPE paper against Steedman), abstraction is always a necessity in measuring. The question is to put it clear which level of abstraction are we using.

This is, I think, Brody read by the light of Martinez Marzoa.


This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu May 02 2002 - 00:00:09 EDT