LETS GET PHYSICALIST WITH THE TSSI METHOD.
July 5, 2020 6 Comments
- analytical
- CURRENT ECONOMIC ANALYSIS
- political
- PROGRAMME
- theoretical
- TRANSFORMATION PROBLEM
- TURNOVER FORMULA
- Uncategorized
This article has been updated.
-
Follow
Following
Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
THEPLANNINGMOTIVE.COM 
“Marx determined, correctly that market value equates to c + v + s ”
That’s not exactly what Marx determined. Market value is an average.
In Chapter 10 of volume 3 Marx describes market value:
“Market value is to viewed on the one hand as the average value of the commodities produced in the particular sphere, and on the other hand as the individual values of commodities produced under average conditions.”
Market value presumes a market equilibrium where demand and supply match and therefore:
“Strictly speaking, the average price or market value of each individual commodity or each aliquot part of the total mass is now determined by the total value of this mass, which is arrived at by adding together the values of the commodities produced under various conditions, and by the aliquot part of this total value that falls to the share of the individual commodity. “
I am aware of these quotes. Chapter 10 is unfortunately discordant.
On page 284 of the Penguin edition (about ten pages into the chapter) Marx discusses, in my opinion, market value more concretely. In the paragraphs there he uses the word preponderance which is another word for weighting. He points out that in those industries where there is a preponderance of lower cost producers, the market value in that industry will reside below the average cost of production and vice versa in those industries where there is a preponderance of higher cost producers. Thus, he makes a sharp distinction between average conditions and market value (or social value which he sometimes juxtaposes).
This is really important. The move from the abstract to the concrete is the re-introduction of differences. But differences need not only be identified, they need to be quantified, that is weighted statistically. Thus, the movement from the abstract to the concrete is the reintroduction of weighted differences in order to determine their effect and interaction. Weightings would apply to for example, the difference in the composition of capital, the differences in skill, rates of exploitation, terms of trade and so on.
I hope this clears up the issues relating to Chapter 10, the chapter residing in the shadow of Chapter 9, but a chapter I consider to be of the highest importance.
Chapter 10 is indeed “discordant.”
Unfortunately Marx’s discussion beginning on p 284 does not support the assertion that market value will always equal c + v+ s of the commodities. Marx is examining 3 cases: case I where the commodities produced under the best and worst conditions balance each other; case II where the individual amounts of the commodities produced under the best and worst conditions do not balance each other with those produced under the worst conditions determining the market value; case III where those produced under the best conditions outweigh those produced under the worst conditions.
Only in Case l is the market value of the entire mass, “as governed by the average values …equal to the sum of its individual values.”
The market value does not simply correspond to c +v +s of the commodities but the “weighted” value and…..the market conditions themselves, the imbalance between supply and demand. In fact on page 286, Marx refers to his exercise, and the category of market value as an abstraction of market price.
I agree 10 is a discussion secondary to the analysis in Chapter 9.
Will you accept the following proposition: the value of goods produced by a specific industry is equal to the volume sold multiplied by its weighted average cost of production. It is not equal to the volume sold multiplied by its average cost of production unless this average cost coincides with the weighted average cost which is the exception rather than the rule.
Egg-zackly!
Then we agree.