Re: [OPE-L] basics vs. non-basics

From: Paul Cockshott (wpc@DCS.GLA.AC.UK)
Date: Tue Sep 20 2005 - 05:58:01 EDT

I would be keen to defend the notion of a basic sector.


In reply to Ian.

Sraffa says that in principle the wage should be split

into a portion necessary for the reproduction of labour

power, and a portion that constitutes part of the surplus

that can be struggled over. I think this is certainly correct.

If one took that view of it, the basic sector would include

those products whose production was necessary to the

reproduction of the working population.


I am unconvinced that things would be materially changed

by expressing things as continuous flows rather than

as annual rounds of production. One would still get

R as a variable expressing now the maximal instantaneous

rate of expansion of the economy as a time derivative

rather than expressing the expansion as an annual



I don't see why Phil is opposed to the notion of a material



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Sep 21 2005 - 00:00:02 EDT