[OPE-L:2285] Re: Measuring value

Joh (ernst@nyc.pipeline.com)
Sat, 18 May 1996 23:33:06 -0700

[ show plain text ]


I think there is a bit of confusion here.

You write:

(among other things)

>Now let me turn to John Ernst's response to my post. I appreciate his
>about my spelling of "speeds" as "seeds".
>I did not quite understand his conclusion, that instantaneous adjustment
>models can work.
>Let me make my own position clear for what it is worth. We can fall into

>the trap of refining our models a la neo-classical economics. But that
>effort will not do us any good.
>The use of the models is to help us make a qualitative point. For
>on the levels of prices, exploitation does not exist -- at least as most
>economists see it. If I work 8 hours and get 8 hours of wages, everything

>is fair. Value theory lets us understand the roots of exploitation.
>Whether 4.56 or 4.59 hours of my labor is surplus value is something we
>can quibble about, but it will not get us far.
>We need our models to help us understand and to communicate.
>Maybe I am wrong, and competition makes the adjustment process occur
>quickly. Good, we can talk about it. The answer to that question will
>us to understand how the system works.

I simply said it might be interesting to look at work that involves
revaluation and that which doesn't. If the same economic structure is
modeled in
each, I suspect that the results would be quite different. I do not think
value" necessarily means assuming instantaneous revaluation.