Your question is legitimate. I don't think that you will alienate me with a good question.
It will take me a while to dig up the specific refs. Maybe I should put this on your list. Marx never finished his concept of fictitious capital, but you can see it taking forming in several places. He sees technology shocks is being very important in destroying pre-existing values, as in his description of Babbage's machine for making patent nets (I'm not sure what they are) or in a letter in which he says something to the effect that he suspects that nobody beginning a new industry ever gets his money back. There are repeated references to the unexpected cotton crisis. I don't recall anything about demand shifts. On Sat, Jan 31, 2009 at 07:11:01PM -0500, Julio Huato wrote: > Michael Perelman wrote: > > > Marx's term fictitious capital and the more conventional discounted > > present value are not entirely different, but Marx's expression emphasizes > > the fact that the future is both unknown and unknowable. > > Michael, > > While I'm at it (alienating my friends by contradicting them), where > are the quotations that substantiate your claim that Marx's notion of > fictitious capital "emphasizes the fact that the future is both > unknown and unknowable"? > _______________________________________________ > pen-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu michaelperelman.wordpress.com _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
