Freeman, Alan (1999): The limits of Ricardian value: law, contingency and motion in economics.
Download (323Kb) | Preview
This paper discusses the relation between law and contingency in the formation of value. It begins from a much-ignored assertion of Marx, repeated throughout his works, that the equality of supply and demand is contingent and their non-equality constitutes their law. This highly complex and original idea leads us to the idea of capitalism, and a market, as an entity which perpetuates itself by failing to perpetuate itself: it is the fact that supply diverges from demand which causes the system to continue, not the fact that supply equals demand, which is only the case as a statistical average and never exactly holds. This fundamental and unrecognised difference between Marx’s approach and that of the classicals also distinguishes Marx from most modern economics, which has focussed on equilibrium as the de facto defining principle from which value may be deduced. The problem is exactly the opposite: it is to define a conception of value which does not require equilibrium and makes no presupposition that supply equals demand, that goods are sold, that profits equalise, or that any of the ‘lawlike’ properties of an ideal market actually hold. The ‘lawlike’ properties of a market must then be deduced as an outcome of the dynamic, that is temporal, behaviour of the market, expressed in terms of the interaction between value so defined and use value. In order that such a concept of value may have universal applicability, price has to be reformulated as a form of value, and money theorised on this foundation. This article, presented to the EEA mini-conference on value in 1999, sets out the general principles involved.
Keywords: Crisis, inequality, market failure, TSSI, Temporalism, Marx, Value, Marshall, Walras, equilibrium, non-equilibrium, history of thought, Keynes, Austrian Economics, Post-Keynesian economics, Ricardo
|Item Type:||MPRA Paper|
|Institution:||The University of Greenwich|
|Original Title:||The limits of Ricardian value: law, contingency and motion in economics|
|Keywords:||Crisis; inequality; market failure; TSSI; Temporalism; Marx; Value; Marshall; Walras; equilibrium; non-equilibrium; history of thought; Keynes; Austrian Economics; Post-Keynesian economics; Ricardo|
|Subjects:||B - History of Economic Thought, Methodology, and Heterodox Approaches > B5 - Current Heterodox Approaches
B - History of Economic Thought, Methodology, and Heterodox Approaches > B5 - Current Heterodox Approaches > B51 - Socialist; Marxian; Sraffian
B - History of Economic Thought, Methodology, and Heterodox Approaches > B1 - History of Economic Thought through 1925 > B14 - Socialist; Marxist
B - History of Economic Thought, Methodology, and Heterodox Approaches > B4 - Economic Methodology
B - History of Economic Thought, Methodology, and Heterodox Approaches > B3 - History of Economic Thought: Individuals > B31 - Individuals
B - History of Economic Thought, Methodology, and Heterodox Approaches > B1 - History of Economic Thought through 1925 > B12 - Classical (includes Adam Smith)
|Depositing User:||Alan Freeman|
|Date Deposited:||05. Apr 2007|
|Last Modified:||14. Feb 2013 11:24|
Bortkiewicz, L. von (1952), ‘Value and Price in the Marxian System’(part I), in International Economic Papers, 1952(2), 5-60. Originally published in two parts in German as ‘Wertrechnung und Preisrechnung im Marxschen System’(part I), Archiv für Sozialwissenschaft und Sozialpolitik, Band XXIII (I), July 1906; (parts II and III) Archiv für Sozialwissenschaft und Sozialpolitik, Band XXV, July and September 1907. Arthur, Chris (1996) on Engels Duménil, G (1980), De la Valeur aux Prix de Production. Une Réinterprétation de la Transformation, Paris: Economica Foley, D (1999) ‘Reply to David Laibman’ in Review of Political Economy (#?), JAI Press Foley, D (1982), ‘The Value of Money, the Value of Labour Power and the Marxian Transformation Problem’, Review of Radical Political Economics, 14(2). Foley, D (1997), ‘Recent Developments in the Labor Theory of Value’, paper to 1997 IWGVT mini-conference Foley, D (1999), ‘Response to David Laibman’ in Review of International Political Economy 1999 Freeman, A (1996) last chapter of Freeman and Carchedi(1996) Freeman, A (1995) Accumulation and relative surplus value, paper to 1995 IWGVT mini-conference. Freeman, A and Carchedi,M (1996) Marx and non-equilibrium economics : Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Garegnani(0000) Freeman, A (1997) ‘Time, Money and the Quantification of Value’, paper to 1997 IWGVT mini-conference Giussani, P (1996), ‘Demand, supply and market prices’, in Carchedi and Freeman (1996) Hegel (1995) The Science of Logic Tr:Miller. London: George Allen and Unwin Kautsky, K (1925) The Economic Doctrines of Karl Marx Tr:Stenning. London: George Black Kliman, A (0000) the ‘scorecard’ paper Lee, C.-O. (1993). Marx's Labour Theory of Value Revisited, Cambridge Journal of Economics 17:4. Laibman, David (1999) “Rhetoric and Substance in Value Theory: an Appraisal of the New Orthodox Marxism” forthcoming in Kliman and Freeman (1999) The New Value Controversy, Cheltenham: Elgar Louça, F (1996) Turbulence in Economics. Cheltenham: Elgar Mandel, E and Freeman, A (1984) (eds) Marx, Ricardo, Sraffa, London:Verso. Marx (1844) Excerpts from James Mills’s Political Economy ________ (1969a), Theories of Surplus Value, Part I. London: Lawrence and Wishart. ________ (1969b), Theories of Surplus Value, Part II. London: Lawrence and Wishart. ________ (1972), Theories of Surplus Value, Part III. London: Lawrence and Wishart. ________ (1974) The Grundrisse, Harmondsworth: Penguin ________ (1975) Early Writings, Harmondsworth: Penguin ________ (1978) The Poverty of Philosophy, Moscow: Progress ________ (1979) Capital: Volume I: Harmondsworth: Penguin ________ (1981) Capital: Volume III: Harmondsworth: Penguin McGlone and Kliman(1996) ‘One system or two? The transformation of values into prices of production versus the transformation problem’ in Freeman and Carchedi(1996) Moseley, F (1993), ‘Marx’s Logical Method and the “Transformation Problem”’, in Moseley, F(ed.) Marx’s Method in Capital: a reexamination. Atlantic Highlands, N.J.: Humanities. Rodriguez, A (1996). “Money, the postulates of invariance and the transformation of Marx into Ricardo” in Freeman, A and Carchedi, M (eds) (1996) Ramos, A and Rodriguez, A (1996) “The transformation of values into prices of production: a different reading of Marx’s text” in Freeman, A and Carchedi, M (eds) (1996) Pasinetti, L. (1977), Lectures in the Theory of Production. New York: Columbia. Sraffa, P (1960) The Production of Commodities by Means of Commodities. Cambridge: CUP Shaikh, A (1984) ‘The transformation from Marx to Sraffa’ in Mandel and Freeman (1984) Sowell, P (1974) Classical Economics Reconsidered, Princeton: Princeton University Press Steedman, I (1977), Marx after Sraffa. London: New Left Books. Sweezy, P.M. (1970), The Theory of Capitalist Development; Principles of Marxian Political Economy, New York, Modern Reader Paperbacks (l970) and London (1942). Wolff, R., Roberts, B. and Callari, A. (l982), ‘Marx’s (not Ricardo’s) “Transformation Problem”: A Radical Reconceptualization’, History of Political Economy, Vol 14 No. 4., pp 564-582.