[OPE-L:7143] [OPE-L:644] (no subject)

Gerald Levy (glevy@pratt.edu)
Wed, 10 Mar 1999 15:48:06 -0500 (EST)

From: David Laibman <DLaibman@brooklyn.cuny.edu>
Subject: [OPE-L:643] Re: Re: Use and abuse of mat
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 99 16:18:00 EST

I am an "anyone" responding to Steve's post.

I very much like the distinction between substantive equality and numeraire
equality. It is quite clear to me that Marx *did* posit the former. I am
not too worried about the "=" sign; this is obviously literal nonsense, but
the intended meaning is clear.

Steve's question is exactly right: what does the argument gain from the
substantive equality postulate? What would the Marxian system lose as a
result of its rejection? In short: what arguments from within the political
economy of capitalism can be adduced to warrant retention of the substantive
equality argument (or, as I have called it, the value postulate)?

Now, on to Boston!


David Laibman