Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site topaz.ARPA
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!cbdkc1!desoto!packard!topaz!josh
From: josh@topaz.ARPA (J Storrs Hall)
Newsgroups: net.politics.theory
Subject: Re: What is "capitalism"?
Message-ID: <1855@topaz.ARPA>
Date: Wed, 1-May-85 01:40:36 EDT
Article-I.D.: topaz.1855
Posted: Wed May  1 01:40:36 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 1-May-85 07:34:28 EDT
References: <441@gargoyle.UChicago.UUCP> <1831@topaz.ARPA> <1008@uwmacc.UUCP>
Reply-To: josh@topaz.UUCP (J Storrs Hall)
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.
Lines: 29

In article <1008@uwmacc.UUCP> myers@uwmacc.UUCP (Jeff Myers) writes:

>Hm.  I'm a bit confused here.  2+2=5.  It may take less labor TIME to build
>5000 widjets using a lathe (including labor time to build the lathe) than
>to chisel and sand them, but I fail to see how this makes the lathe any
>less stored labor.  Yes, the lathe does increase the productivity of
>labor.  This means, according to the labor theory of value, that the VALUE
>of an hour of this more productive labor is higher than the VALUE of an
>hour of the chisler's time.
>
What then is the VALUE of the labor "stored" in the lathe?  It depends,
obviously, on what you use it for;  but the significant point is that
it *multiplies* the "value" of the succeeding labor by some factor,
rather than merely adding to it.  The thing to note is that if you 
iterate the production of capital, using each generation to help
create the next, the result is an *exponential* increase in wealth.
This is why capitalism (in my sense) is such hot stuff.


>JoSH is correct [in part].  However, methinks he is pointing
>this out to discredit Marx...
>Jeff Myers				The views above may or may not

Although I have no scruples against discrediting Marx, the dig
at the labor theory of value was really a throwaway remark.
I really don't see how anyone who has studied economics can take it
(the labor theory) seriously.

--JoSH