I agree with quite a lot of what you are saying Jim
________________________________________
 Paul
> The currency has no price, but is the measure of price, the problem is to 
> explain how a standard of price and measure of value which itself has no 
> value can operate as a social form.<
Jim
Currency has a price: to me its price refers to the amount of goods
and services that are necessary to buy a unit of currency. That's
nothing but the inverse of the average price level. Alternatively, one
could talk about the value of currency (how much socially-necessary
abstract labor-time is required to make a unit of currency) or its
exchange-value (how much socially-necessary abstract labor-time a unit
of currency can command). With fiat money -- maintained by state power
-- the exchange-value of currency exceeds its value.
=================
Paul
Yes money has an exchange value, but it does not have a price, it is what gives 
everything else a price.

Jim
For other prices, it's not currency that is used as a measure but
rather the units of the currency (US$, British pounds, etc.)

How can a standard of price operate as a social form? for fiat money,
it's state power which allows it to do so.

Currency is not a measure of value. Instead, it's hours of
socially-necessary abstract labor time which measure value.
 --
 ==============
You are correct that it is the unit of currency that is the measure, I gave the 
Krona as an example of such a unit.

I agree that for fiat money state power is what allows it to operate as a 
social form. My original question was, given that it is the power of the crown 
upon which the Krona is based, what determines its value is it the quantity of 
labour that the King commands or the quantity of labour power he purchases. Ie, 
if the Crown spends Krona 1 million employing teachers etc, is the value of the 
Krona the number of hours the teachers etc work for this 1 million Krona, or is 
it the number of hours embodied in the wage goods the teachers consume?

If the Swedish economy were fully socialised and the state maintained labour 
accounts, then value could be measured in hours of labour, but given that it is 
only partially socialised, and that there is a large private sector dependent 
on commodity exchange the measure is indirect via an exchangeable currency.

Now in principle, the state could denominate its notes in hours, basing them on 
the number of hours work actually done by public employees. This would as 
Engels said amount to socialist propaganda within the remaining capitalist 
sector since it would unmask the relation of exploitation on which that sector 
rested. As such it could constitute a transitional step to a fully socialised 
economy.

The University of Glasgow, charity number SC004401
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

Reply via email to