[OPE-L:8291] Re: Milios et al, "Karl Marx and the Classics"

From: Paul Zarembka (zarembka@buffalo.edu)
Date: Tue Jan 07 2003 - 12:49:49 EST


Your posting summarizes your book.  You don't address: 
 i) "why didn't Marx, on the eighth page, call the reader's attention to
his project [as you describe it] of 'theoretically recasting' of that
supposedly Ricardian value?";
 ii) the CHANGES by Marx represented by the three editions of Vol. 1; 
 iii) "labor power" as a MAJOR new theoretical concept distinguishing Marx
from Ricardo;
 iv) the fact of total working hours of workers compared to the time
required to produce subsistence needs (a fact which you say cannot be
described by 'values' even in the simplest of capitalist reproduction).

Taking your argument to the extreme, surplus value cannot be measured and
so we don't even know if profit is associated with surplus value (Steedman
or no Steedman) or the color of grapefruits. Surplus value becomes a
mystery. Yours opens the road to revisions of all sorts, including just
dumping value and surplus value.

Paul Z.

"Confronting 9-11, Ideologies of Race, and Eminent Economists", Vol. 20
RESEARCH IN POLITICAL ECONOMY,  Paul Zarembka, editor, Elsevier Science
******************** http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/PZarembka

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jan 08 2003 - 00:00:00 EST