[OPE-L:1202] Re: LVB6:What's in a definition?

Paul_Cockshott (wpc@cs.strath.ac.uk)
Fri, 23 Feb 1996 08:45:45 -0800

[ show plain text ]


So I repeat, whatever Marx does say about the value of money, the one thing
he categorically does *not* say is that *prices* are determined by the labour
content of gold!

I accept that Marx thought that the exchange
value of gold could, like that of any other
commodity, rise above its value.

However, this relates to phenomena of *market
prices*, and the rise or fall in the exchange
value of gold is there driven by multiple
contingent circumstances.

Your method of fixing total prices equal to
total values

a) has the effect of determining an exchange
value for gold

b) is part and parcel of a proposed technique
for computing *values* not market prices.

Since you are engaged in a process of value
determination, I do not see that you are entitled
to make arbitrary assumptions about market prices.
Why should the market price of gold be that which
ensures total prices equal total values?