This paper presents an interpretation of the quantitative dimension of Marx's value theory in which prices and values are determined interdependently and within historical time. This interpretation is then shown to refute allegations that his value theory suffers from internal inconsistencies. Among the issues considered are Marx's law of the falling rate of profit, the alleged redundancy of value, value determination under joint production, and the 'transformation problem.' The 'single-system' interpretation of values and prices as interdependent eliminates the alleged inconsistencies that pertain to magnitude; the 'temporal' interpretation of value and price magnitudes as determined in historical time eliminates the alleged inconsistencies that pertain to determination.
This paper examines the claims made by Simon Mohun and Roberto Veneziani in their Capital and Class #92 article entitled 'The incoherence of the TSSI: a reply to Kliman and Freeman'. We show that they have effectively conceded that simultaneist interpretations of Marx's theory contradict his conclusion that exploitation (workers' surplus labor) is the exclusive source of profit in capitalism. We demonstrate the errors of logic in their claim that the TSS interpretation is incoherent. The debate thus confirms that the TSS interpretation-contrary to simultaneist interpretationsreproduce all Marx's principal disputed conclusions and therefore constitutes a superior interpretation of his theory of value. Simultaneous Valuation vs. the Exploitation Theory of Profit: A summing up What Is at Stake? The central issue in this debate has been the incompatibility between simultaneist interpretations and Marx's own theory of profit, as is clear from the title of Andrew Kliman's (2001) initial contribution, "Simultaneous Valuation vs. the Exploitation Theory of Profit." 1 Overturning the conventional wisdom of a quarter-century, our prior contributions have demonstrated that all simultaneist interpretations of Marx's theory contradict his conclusion that exploitation (workers' surplus labor) is the exclusive source of profit in capitalism. Simon Mohun and Roberto Veneziani (M&V) (2007) simply evade this issue. They do not refute, nor even attempt to refute, our demonstration. Hence, they effectively concede that Marx's theory and simultaneous valuation are indeed incompatible. It is time for the wider community to recognize this as well. As we document below, M&V also fail to respond directly to several other key arguments contained in our response to Mohun's (2003) critique. Instead, they change the subject, railing against what they grandly call the "incoherence" of the temporal single-system interpretation (TSSI) of Marx's value theory and our "seriously deficient" arguments, logic, and reporting of opponents' views (M&V 2007: 139, 144). The grandness of their rhetoric stands in inverse proportion to the effectiveness and relevance of their arguments. What they actually offer is only a collection of technical and tangential quibbles which evades the significant issues in this debate and which functions principally to cast aspersions upon ourselves and the TSSI. Thus they lambast our demonstration that the TSSI conforms to Marx's theory of profit because we supposedly failed to exclude the possibility that all commodities are free and the possibility that living labour initially creates a negative amount of value in monetary terms. Yet they provide no argument, much less proof, that either of these extreme, hypothetical cases is logically possible. Even if these and other quibbles of theirs were formally correct-and we will show that they are not-the flimsiness of M&V's objections would make clear that they are grasping at straws. Yet why are M&V trying to discredit the TSSI? We believe that their ultimate target is Marx. T...
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.