merits of this discussion

Waistline2 at aol.com Waistline2 at aol.com
Mon Nov 10 17:02:22 MST 2003


In a message dated 11/10/03 2:45:20 PM Pacific Standard Time,
ryanhokanson at yahoo.com writes:

>I had many more questions, but I'll try and stick to one at a time. Humor me
a little longer, please?

Why, if oil is going to run out in 7 days, is the human labor that went into
(or is going to go into) the production of said oil going to be less?<

Reply

Because the technological revolution is absolute.  This is not humor but a
serious question. DMS has provided the historical data that proves and
illustrated the cost factors of oil production. "Cost" is a category of political
economy and bourgeois economy that means the deployment of human labor and
technology in the process of production.

Technology reduces the amount of human labor need in the production of
commodities. There is no way around this no matter what ones approach. The question
has to be thought out as a curve of development.

Think about all sides of the process under conditions where the existence of
oil is in decline. What appears is the extreme divergence of price and value.

For real. Value is the amount of labor that goes into producing one barrel of
oil.

DMS has given the stats over the past 25 - 30 years, at least since Nixon and
the emergence of the petrodollar.

The value of oil is falling despite its finite quantity. It's deeper. The
damn price of oil continues to fall and political maneuver is used to drive the
price upwards.

Look ... at worse, the theory of the limited supply of oil as having reached
its juncture, crossed over and begun the historical decline in the life of
humanity and become KNOWN, is not reflected in its price today.

If this was the case oil would be priced - despite its value, not utility -
at $400.00 a barrel.

The issue is bourgeois property relations.

Really.

Melvin P.


~~~~~~~
PLEASE clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.



More information about the Marxism mailing list