**Next message:**Drewk: "[OPE-L:5044] RE: The RRPE Controversy"**Previous message:**Fred B. Moseley: "[OPE-L:5043] Re: Centres of Gravity"**In reply to:**Drewk: "[OPE-L:5029] RE: numerical example!!!"**Next in thread:**Drewk: "[OPE-L:5045] RE: numerical example!!!"**Reply:**Drewk: "[OPE-L:5045] RE: numerical example!!!"**Messages sorted by:**[ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Thanks very much to Andrew and Allin for their helpful posts. I stand corrected about the real wage. I can see now that a given real wage, along with the given technical conditions, uniquely determine the rate of profit. So whether or not technical conditions uniquely determine the rate of profit depends on whether the real wage or the money wage is taken as given along with the technical conditions. I didn't realize that before. I will certainly think about this some more. I think I understand better now what the problem is: the assumption of a given real wage. According to my interpretation of Marx's theory, the MONEY wage is taken as given, not the real wage. The given money wage is then used (along with other variables) to determine individual prices, including the price of wage-goods. From the given money wage and the individual prices thus determined, one could derive the implicit real wage. Andrew, in your original arguments years ago, you decomposed my aggregate monetary variables into unit prices and quantities by assuming (among other things) a GIVEN REAL WAGE. This given real wage is then used (along with the technical conditions of production) to determine unit prices and the rate of profit. From the given real wage and the unit prices thus determined, one could derive the implicit money wage. Therefore, when you assume a given real wage in converting my equations into the Sraffian equations, you are using a different method of determining the real wage than in my interpretation of Marx's theory. You are assuming essentially the opposite method of determination. You thereby converted my interpretation into the Sraffian interpretation. It is not surprising that you end up with results that are the same as the Sraffian results. They are the Sraffian results. But they are no longer my results. They do not prove that my results are the same as the Sraffian results. Because they are derived by assuming a given real wage, rather than a given money wage. I look forward to continuing this discussion in detail next week - and at the IWGVT this weekend. See you there. Comradely, Fred

**Next message:**Drewk: "[OPE-L:5044] RE: The RRPE Controversy"**Previous message:**Fred B. Moseley: "[OPE-L:5043] Re: Centres of Gravity"**In reply to:**Drewk: "[OPE-L:5029] RE: numerical example!!!"**Next in thread:**Drewk: "[OPE-L:5045] RE: numerical example!!!"**Reply:**Drewk: "[OPE-L:5045] RE: numerical example!!!"**Messages sorted by:**[ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

*
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30
: Thu Mar 01 2001 - 14:01:40 EST
*