Re: [OPE-L] basics vs. non-basics

From: Gerald_A_Levy@MSN.COM
Date: Wed Sep 28 2005 - 08:35:01 EDT

> The only point I want to make is this: In a real economy, not one where
> there is proportional growth in every branch (like the one implied in
> Paul's  Mole-Sraffian notion), we have only one way to know which has
> been the rate of growth of the economy in physical terms. We have to
> use labour and  measure its quantities in a physical unit: hours, etc.


We can  measure labour in hours in a static model as x many hours of
(simple) labor.   But, in a dynamic model where SNLT changes
temporally, there is no longer a single, unambiguous  unit of measurement
for labour time.  E.g. the customary intensity of labor changes over time
(and, of  course, varies spatially as well from one social formation to
another) thus changing SNLT.

> Marx once wrote about Adam Smith being too Scottisch. I would say that
> those who can conceive of an aggregate physical surplus in terms others
> than labour-Time are too Scottisch as well.

Where did Marx write this?   What does this expression imply?
It sounds like an anti-Scottish stereotype and slur....

In solidarity, Jerry

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Sep 30 2005 - 00:00:02 EDT