> On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 1:08 PM, Philip Pilkington <
> pilkingtonphil at gmail.com
> > wrote:
>
>
>
> > I think the basis of this distinction comes down to value theory. Is the
> > price regulated by the amount of labour-input in the production sector or
> > does it "free-float" in the consumption sector? I'm with Doug on this
> one,
> > consumption is just as much a determinate as production. But one thing I
> > have been thinking about since the crisis is whether back in
> > Marx's/Ricardo's time prices WERE in fact set majorly by production costs
> > while in our time they're set increasingly by guesswork and consumer
> > sentiments. If this were the case and if most theories of political
> economy
> > rely heavily on notions of clean information and equilibrium this could
> > introduce serious distortions... Maybe...
>
>
> Hey Philip,
>
> Demand _does_ have a role in determining both the value and
> price-of-production of commodities in Ricardo and Marx. In Marx it enters
> through the 'socially necessary' part of 'socially necessary labour-time'.
> Because the cost of production per unit changes with the amount produced:
> economies of scale etc.
>
>
Agreed. But its very subordinate. I hate to be so "po-mo" about this, but VERY little of Marx's or Ricardo's arguments are taken up with explaining consumption (demand). They spend all their time on production (accumulation). In fact, so does much economic theory and I wonder how concrete it is due to this. Predicting the actions of producers in a society of consumers may be a little off..... maybe...