At 09:30 AM 4/28/01 -0700, PD wrote:
>The question of "sensemaking" simply doesn't make any sense here, I think
>Phil knows very well that labor and only labor is the source of value is
>Marxist economics and that he was just going off on me for reasons that had
>everything to do with his perception of me and nothing to do with marxist
>economics.
That's entirely incorrect.
My style of presentation had to do with my perception of you, Paul, not my
assertions.
As for the content, I honestly believe that you have not comprehended Marx.
So I agree that it's not a matter of interpretation.
As far as i am concerned, and many other, "Labor and only labor" is not the
source of all value in Marx's writing, though some later Marxists made it a
dogma. That was Smith's thesis -- "labour is the original price paid for
all things" [roughly] (W.O.N. book1)
Anyway, that was not even our original argument.
And how did I get dragged back into this?
Leave me out of it from hereon, please.
I'm done.
Phil
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue May 01 2001 - 01:02:08 PDT