[OPE-L:4989] Re: Production and Circulation

Chai-on Lee (conlee@chonnam.chonnam.ac.kr)
Tue, 13 May 1997 07:33:49 -0700 (PDT)

[ show plain text ]

At 03:01 97-05-13 -0700, Ajit wrote:

>My question is, what is the point of translating these monetary values to
>labor units ex-post?

Chai-on: No point. It is of no significance.

>In my opinion, Fred is simply wrong. Marx
>argued that the value of the constant capital must be measured by the
>labor-time it takes to reproduce the constant capital currently, and not how
>much it costs in monetary terms currently.

Chai-on: Well, as far as we assume the market value of the machine is
determined by its intrinsic value, we can measure the current value of the
machine with its purchasing cost.
In that sense only, I think, Fred's position is no harmful.

>If we take Fred's position, then
>we must admit that value is determined by the prices rather than the other
>way round, and that too in a most unsatisfactory manner, as I have argued
>before and Fred is yet to respond to my criticisms of his tansformation
>problem solution.

Although prices are determined by values, we can mneasure the value by the
prices since the latter is determined by the former. Just as we measure the
degree of temperature by the height of mercury, we measure the value by
prices. Still, Fred's argument is no harmful provided that we admit it with
a grain of salt.