[Ian gave me permission to send this one-to-one communication to the pen-l
list as a whole.]
I wrote:the real-world fallacy of composition (or division) is
crucial: in this context, it says that the microeconomic processes
governed by prices do not correspond to the macroeconomic processes
In a message dated 2/5/2002 8:59:14 AM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
As Cornel West's analysis of Marx's take on morality suggests, Marx
applied the standards of "bourgeois right" (trading at price = value) to
show that capitalist violates _its own standards_. Marx clearly had
- Original Message -
From: Devine, James [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2002 6:56 AM
Subject: [PEN-L:22384] RE: Re: value vs. price
[Ian gave me permission to send this one-to-one communication to
the pen-l
list as a whole.]
I wrote:the real-world
- Original Message -
From: Devine, James [EMAIL PROTECTED]
you can't understand what Marx is talking about in CAPITAL if you
don't
understand his jargon and more importantly, his way of approaching
the
question, which is summarized by his phrase the law of value.
This lack of
miyachi [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]writes:
Sir Devine, James
I am not a British lord, but a commoner (a better class of human being,
BTW).
your definition on price and value is incorrect. price is false
appearance of a category of value product.
I wasn't defining price or value. I was making
