[OPE-L:4065] Re: Simultaneism in Sheep's Clothing

andrew kliman (Andrew_Kliman@msn.com)
Sun, 26 Jan 1997 17:35:12 -0800 (PST)

[ show plain text ]

A reply to just one aspect of John's ope-l 4062.

John writes: "I think the firm anticipates the moral depreciation and allows
for it in each period. Let's check this out by way of example. Initially or
at t(0), a machine costs 100, after the first period of production or at t(1)
a new machine costs 90. Thus, the capitalist using the machine in this period
will allow for 10 in depreciation. Thus, at t(1) we have a new machine costing
90 and the original machine has a value of 90."

If you hold to this conception, then indeed my proof goes out the window. I'd
prefer that you chucked this conception out the window. I cannot understand
at all how or why a partially used machine will always be worth as much as a
new --- unused --- machine of the same sort.

What I need from John is the following: assume that all capitals are
identical, in a one sector economy, and that all capitalists know everything
perfectly. But don't just let price changes drop in from the sky, external to
some individual capital. Endogenize them. If all capitals are identical, and
the economy is one-sector, prices equal values. Values are the sum of value
transferred + value added by living labor. Show me how value transfer is
determined under these conditions. If I understand it under these conditions,
I can understand it under other conditions. But I'll never understand it
under other conditions without first understanding it under these conditions.
(If you really think that a partially used and a new machine are worth the
same, however, don't bother with any examples, because I'll never accept them