Re: [OPE] peanut butter value-form theory

From: Alejandro Agafonow <>
Date: Sat Mar 28 2009 - 11:53:15 EDT

But Philip, in any case (labour time accounting or money accounting) a loss of value occurs since the use-value of the commodity didn’t arise. It is easy to see in a money accounting system since the revenue is not possible to be accrued due to the rejection on the part of consumers to pay for contaminated crackers.   It is a little bit more difficult to see in a labour time accounting, since the value in itself is claimed to be labor-time. But the devaluation pointed out by Engels implies a loss of value indeed. And here arises a problematic aspect of LTV: it is difficult to understand how value (labor time) which is crystallized in a concrete substance (contaminated crackers) can just disappear since the substance in question keeps embodied in a commodity.   This problem is overcome is we just accept that value is a ‘subjective phenomenon’ linked to the satisfaction provided to consumers.   Regards,A. Agafonow ________________________________ De: Philip Dunn <> Para: Outline on Political Economy mailing list <> Enviado: sábado, 28 de marzo, 2009 15:39:38 Asunto: Re: [OPE] peanut butter value-form theory On Sat, 2009-03-28 at 14:03 +0000, Alejandro Agafonow wrote: > Philip D. **The strictly ex-post value accounting take on this says > that, since the contaminated crackers could not be sold, said crackers > were never the material bearer of value. Even though peanuts etc. were > used up in making them and useful labour performed, no constant > capital could be transferred and no labour value added since there is > no commodity formed from the contaminated crackers.** > >  > > In this case a loss of value occurs, the recognition of which is > essential in a rational accounting system. So, it is indispensable to > distinguish the reasons of the transference of no constant capital and > the addition of no labour value, i.e. 1) Non-labor performed or 2) > labor performed in useless commodities. > >  > > A. Agafonow > Hi I was claiming that there was no value to lose. The firm producing the crackers might have imprudently recorded sales revenue, value added and profit in its accounts. These accounts must be corrected to show that there was no any sales revenue, value added or profit. No doubt useful labour can be associated with the bad crackers. Money measured labour is reduced since sales revenue is less than it would have been if no contamination occurred. An accounting identity: Money measured labour = value of sales revenue less value of non-wage expenses. _______________________________________________ ope mailing list

ope mailing list
Received on Sat Mar 28 11:55:22 2009

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Mar 31 2009 - 00:00:03 EDT