[OPE-L:2415] Re: commodity money in Marx's theory

Chai-on Lee (conlee@chonnam.chonnam.ac.kr)
Wed, 29 May 1996 19:50:23 -0700

[ show plain text ]

Fred wrote on 28 May in [2387] in regard to Riccardo's:

But this still does not seem to explain HOW money was deduced as a
commodity, or WHY money must be a commodity. What is the reasoning that
led to this conclusion?


Money can be substituted by the so-called valueless substitutes.
But we have to see the money as a commodity if we have to analyse
an exchange. If the money is not a commodity, the exchange is not
an exchange but an expropriation (Iam not sure of its exact word,
however). When the paper money is injected into the commodity world as a
value symbol, I would see it as a uni-lateral transfer of
value. Within the commodity world, however, once it is injected, the
money can be seen as a labor-product because it was injected
at the cost of a certain labor.