Ian writes in response to a selected quote from what I wrote about value:
>
> Yes, the rhetorical equivalent of hand-waving is the perfect method
> for rebutting arguments against one hypthesis in KM's mature pe
> analysis. Change the subject and everything is fine. Drag in Hegel and
> you've done what the Church used to do with those who questioned
> Thomas Aquinas' wisdom
Hardly fair at all--indeed, it seems to be you who is waving your hand and changing topics (quite a few there). You actually prove my point--witness your pointless exchanges with CC. The philosophical assumptions are so different you simply can't communicate with a Marxist. Hegel belongs here because Marx read and studied him, have you? Now about the question about 'value', might as well ask what we mean by 'mean' as well while we are at it. My point was that the concept is firmly established in pre-Marxist discourse, if you bother to read it. Marx then goes on to make systematic use of it, because he was systematic, unlike most of the non-Marxist economists I know of. Unlike just about ANY economists I know of.
Next, in reply to CC, Ian also writes:
>
> Fair enough, but price is how time [Augustine, call the Vatican] is > allocated under capitalism. >
Really, much of the work by which I am most exploited gets no price wage attached to it at all. I wonder if I'm the only person in the world who has such an experience everyday of his life? Anyway, waving my hand and changing topics, I have to say you seem to be more concerned with Taylor than Marx. As I said, the intellectual equipment has to be there and pointed in the right direction. To conclude, sure Marx doesn't work when worked out in an economics department in the US--such as economics 'powerhouse' CalBerk (hardy harr harr)--because it isn't the same thing at all. Getting back to the LTV, I think American and UK economists have such a problem with it not because Locke, Smith, Ricardo and Pufendorf gave it to us, but because Marx used a form of it to deny rigourously the assumed, unexamined productive role of capital. OTOH, in current economics (not Marxist political economy), the exact opposite is simply an unexamined given as if Marx's writings never existed. So why waste your time if you don't follow?
Perhaps price is to value, as instantiated words are to meaning. It takes abstraction to deal systematically with subsistent reality, dig?
Fugazy
-- _______________________________________________ NEW! Lycos Dating Search. The only place to search multiple dating sites at once. http://datingsearch.lycos.com