Re: [OPE-L] standard commodity

From: Rakesh Bhandari (bhandari@BERKELEY.EDU)
Date: Thu Mar 24 2005 - 14:21:59 EST

At 4:17 AM -0800 3/24/05, ajit sinha wrote:
>By the way, numeraire does not mean money. Sooner you
>stop confusing the two, the clearer your theoretical
>understanding of economics will become.

Oh please help us, then. How is money different from  a numeraire?

And relatedly please clarify for us the answer to these two questions:

i. what for Marx is the mystery of money? Relatedly, what is
fetishistic about money and what does Marx mean by the peculiarities
of the equivalent form?
ii. how does Marx attempt to account for and dissipate this mystery
or fetishism or peculiarity?

Oh, I forgot, you have already proclaimed that what Marx has to say
about money is of no interest. But your argument for this seemed to
be that that had to be so because you had found no reason to write
about it in your interpretations of the first part of Capital.


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Mar 25 2005 - 00:00:02 EST