[OPE-L:6330] Re: Historical, real and current costs

Gerald Levy (glevy@pratt.edu)
Sat, 21 Mar 1998 15:55:49 -0500 (est)

Alejandro R wrote on Sat, 21 Mar:

> > I think that the "time delay" issue is a dodge.
> Does "dodge" mean "clever trick"?

No, not "clever trick".

In the context in which I wrote it above, you can interpret it as
"to elude or evade by a sudden shift of position or by strategy."
(from _The Random House Dictionary of the English Language_).

> The point is Marx''s distinction between "production time" and
> "working time". Do you think this distinction make sense?

In Marx, yes.

> Sure. But in that case we don''t have an example adequate to deal
> with the distinction we (at least I!) are interested in: the
> distinction between production time and working time. You would have
> an example in which production time = working time, i.e. you don''t
> have examples similar to those presented by Marx in the above cited
> chapter.

Again I challenge your assertion that Andrew's example was similar to
those presented by Marx in V2. To support that contention, you should be
able to show me at least one example in that chapter where Marx employed
the same (or similar) assumptions and specified the problem in the manner
that Andrew did.

For example, Marx was definately _not_ assuming a one-product economy in
that chapter. Indeed, this distinction occurs because of the specific
"nature of the product" and is most "particularly important in
agriculture." It is consequently a distinction that does not arise
because of the nature of capital-in-general but has importance only
within individual branches of production within the context of a
multi-product capitalist economy. Moreover, what does this characteristic,
which arises due to the specific material character of the
individual commodity being produced, have to do with the MELT which is
determined at the level of the macroeconomy?

In solidarity, Jerry