that insight is unique
to Marxism in any sense.
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2009 19:45:58 -0700
From: bhand...@berkeley.edu
Subject: [Marxism] K2 study guide
To: t...@hotmail.com
Grossman offered a profound disequilibrium interpretation of volume II,
as Steve Palmer knows quite well (and please accept my
meaning? how does this differ from financial and cost accounting?
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2009 14:51:28 -0400
From: theguavat...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [Marxism] K2 study guide
To: t...@hotmail.com
On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 12:41 PM, S. Artesian sartes...@earthlink.netwrote:
In fact
Ya know, this whole discussion to me is yet another reflection of the ossified
in-group Talmudic view of certain Marxists who conceit themselves with the
notion that nobody but them knows anything about economics and therefore the
sine quo non is studying the works of a grand old man of the
On Aug 25, 2009, at 3:28 PM, guava tree wrote:
and in this chapter of volume 2 you can find this paragraph:
The productive capital invested in this industry imparts value to the
transported products, partly by transferring value from the means of
transportation, partly by adding value
David knows this better than I do. The railroad promoters got rich;
the investors got burned. Railroads were bankrupt with regularity.
--
Michael Perelman
Economics Department
California State University
Chico, CA 95929
Tel. 530-898-5321
E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu
In a message dated 8/25/2009 12:42:14 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
sartes...@earthlink.net writes:
Equilibrium is accidental, not necessary, and as such is not an
essential
characteristic, either in its presence or absence, to the success or
failure
of capitalism.
We can look at Rakesh
Railroads in their inception and throughout their
consolidation give us an early object lesson in the uses of fictitious
capital.-sartesianAn entertaining take on this history, worthy of HBO's
Deadwood are some recent biographies of Jay Gould and The Commodore
Vanderbilt. Below is a review I
I might take the opportunity to plug my book, Railroading Economics
(Monthly Review). Also, a cheap price.
--
Michael Perelman
Economics Department
California State University
Chico, CA 95929
Tel. 530-898-5321
E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu
michaelperelman.wordpress.com
Yet, sartesian, ships are not discarded simply to maintain the value
proportions between the departments (they may of course be discarded due
to moral or value depreciation as a result of competitive technological
change, but that is another point). As viable technical means of
production or
I guess that means I better read the book. OK, give me a few days.
- Original Message -
From: Michael Perelman mich...@ecst.csuchico.edu
To: David Schanoes sartes...@earthlink.net
Sent: Tuesday, August 25, 2009 9:09 PM
Subject: Re: [Marxism] K2 study guide
On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 09
Also, John Fox's Understanding Capital Volume II, Progress Books, Toronto,
1985 is very helpful, particularly when confronting some of the more demanding
passages on one's own. This is in the queue to appear at the MIA, but don't
hold your breath ...
Steve
thanks for all the comments--I'm
Steve Palmer spalmer...@yahoo.com writes:
Also, John Fox's Understanding Capital Volume II, Progress Books,
Toronto, 1985 is very helpful, particularly when confronting some of
the more demanding passages on one's own. This is in the queue to
appear at the MIA, but don't hold your breath ...
Grossman offered a profound disequilibrium interpretation of volume II,
as Steve Palmer knows quite well (and please accept my profound thanks
for your mighty contributions to the archive). By the way, J.R. Hicks
came to a similar understanding of the special liabilities suffered by
the
Doesn't Harvey attempt to locate Marx's crisis theory in
interdepartmental disproportionalities rather than in insufficient
production of a flow of surplus value? But perhaps we don't have to
choose. Mattick Sr for example wrote (think here of that example where
demand goes from 100 ships to
14 matches
Mail list logo
