Re: [OPE-L] models with unequal turnover periods

From: Fred Moseley (fmoseley@MTHOLYOKE.EDU)
Date: Thu Sep 06 2007 - 22:38:43 EDT

Quoting Paul Cockshott <wpc@DCS.GLA.AC.UK>:

> The standard way is to use a stock matrix as well as flow matrix, if you have
> that you can ignore turnover period since the information in it is encoded
> in the combination of the two matrices.

Hi Paul, I am not talking about unequal turnover periods between fixed
capital and circulating capital (although that is also a big problem in
Sraffian theory, dealt with by the dubious method of treating fixed
capital as "joint products".)  Rather, I am talking about unequal
turnover perods of circulating capital across industries.  This is what
Sraffian theory cannot incorporate, for reasons I explained in my last
message (and copied below).


P.S.  Please send me a reference or two that present the "standard way"
that you mention.  Thanks.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: OPE-L on behalf of glevy@PRATT.EDU
> Sent: Thu 9/6/2007 4:48 PM
> Subject: Re: [OPE-L] models with unequal turnover periods
>> Still playing on my one string violin, what about cases when the turnover
>> period for constant capital is unknown?
> Hi Michael P:
> Then you include it as a variable with an unknown magnitude in the model.
> There are different ways in which this could be done: e.g. one could make
> certain assumptions that could give you a _range_ for the variable.  This
> would, of course, introduce uncertainty into the model and mean that it
> wouldn't yield a single result.  Yet, this is uncertainty which is a
> consequence of the essential nature of the subject matter: i.e. it is
> _real_ uncertainty and shouldn't be eliminated for purposes of
> mathematical convenience.
> In solidarity, Jerry

This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Sep 30 2007 - 00:00:05 EDT