[OPE-L:7600] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: RE: Fred's remarks on Marx, Sraffa & Rents

From: Rakesh Bhandari (rakeshb@stanford.edu)
Date: Thu Sep 05 2002 - 03:49:26 EDT

Gil writes in 7593:

>This is a bit harsh, isn't it?

yes probably was an inaccurate assessment of your manifest criticism.

>   I won't speak for Ajit, but I'd ask you, Rakesh, to point to a 
>single passage I wrote in which I've been "dismissive" about taking 
>cost prices or the MEL (the what?  is this what Fred calls the 
>"money-value produced per hour of abstract labor"?)

yes. But this is a good question. There are several aspects of 
money--the value of money, the monetary expression of labor time, 
money value produced per hour of abstract labor. So we do need some 
subtle analysis to get clear on the distinctions, if any. And at some 
point the Foley-Dumenil new interpretation has to be discussed as 

>  as "givens" in the determination of the average rate of profit. 
>I've raised what I believe to be relevant concerns with respect to 
>this formulation, but I don't consider disagreement and engagement 
>on analytical grounds to be "dismissive."

ok. you weren't dismissive; you made what you considered to be purely 
analytical criticism. I "spoke" badly in that post.

Now are you continuing to defend the inclusion of the gold industry 
in the transformation process? Or are you neither defending nor 
criticizing such inclusion and moving on to fiat money?

All the best, Rakesh

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Sep 06 2002 - 10:13:06 EDT