Re: (OPE-L) Re: Unproductive Labour

From: Philip Dunn (pscumnud@DIRCON.CO.UK)
Date: Mon Nov 24 2003 - 13:33:47 EST

Hi Jerry

Quoting gerald_a_levy <gerald_a_levy@MSN.COM>:

> > If money is an equivalent then there must be an equality such as:
> >  the value of the procuded commodity = the value of the money it sells for
> > Price value deviations are therefore impossible.
> This is the case only in the aggregate abstracting from temporal and
> spatial deviations.

OK.  We have got two different notions of equivalance, hard and soft.
The hard version says that whenever a product is sold, the seller gets an
equivalent amount of money.  The soft version says that the seller does not get

an equivalent amount of money, or only does so by chance.  Is money really an
equivalent in the soft version?  Is it a reasonable use of the term?  An
unequal equivalent?


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Nov 26 2003 - 00:00:01 EST