The tendency of earnings estimates to fall

[James Heartfield]

In message <p0501040db6f102649cd3@[216.254.77.128]>, Doug Henwood
<dhenwood at panix.com> writes
>James Heartfield wrote:
>
>>In message <p05010404b6f0ceb8931e@[166.84.250.86]>, Doug Henwood
>><dhenwood at panix.com> writes
>>>And if you can measure that, you deserve a Nobel.
>>
>>who needs to measure it, when the market does it for us?
>
>Very unstably. 

Ah but its those instabilities that are so creative. If values
corresponded directly to labour time, the market would have ceased to
function.


>Would you use the stock market to value underlying 
>real capital? 

I'm not sure what you mean by 'underlying real capital'. I think it
values - badly and hystrionically no doubt, anticipated value streams.


>Used equipment prices? The computer I'm typing on is a 
>bit over 2 years old and works quite well, but its market value is 
>close to 0. What's it worth?

What's it worth and what's its value are two wholly different questions.

The underlying point though is one that Geoff Pilling made against
Ronald Meek, if I remember rightly. The critique of the law of value is
not an attempt at replacing business's bookkeeping, but understanding
the laws of motion of this society.

-- 
James Heartfield