RE: [OPE] Understanding Value and Use-Value

Date: Wed Apr 29 2009 - 07:58:02 EDT

>> Let's divide c into constant capital which constitutes variable costs (Cvar)
>> and constant capital which constitutes fixed costs (Cfix). In that case the
>> situation above could be described as follows:
>> v = 0
>> s = 0
>> Cvar = 0
>> Cfix => 0
>> Hence:
>> c + v + s => 0
>> and C> 0
> How can this be possible when c + v + s = 0 ?
Hi Phil:
I already answered that: c + v + s equaling -0- is, in this
case, illusory.
One can not simply take an aggregate equality and then apply that
equality to all branches of production (part of the 'micro' level),
periods of time, and regions. This may be the most commonplace
logical error committed by Marxists: the fallacy of division.

> Nothing is produced in March. Any sales receipts in March or later do
> not relate to March production. They could relate to February.
> The firm may have fixed outgoings but that is not the same as fixed
> expenses.

Whether you call them 'outgoings' or 'expenses' they include monies
required on an ongoing basis for the maintenance of the site of
production. For example, if a factory isn't heated, part of the
value and use-value of the rest of the means of production may be
prematurely lost and thereby require additional monies to fix.
In solidarity, Jerry
ope mailing list
Received on Wed Apr 29 08:02:54 2009

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue May 12 2009 - 15:26:04 EDT