dwaltersmia at gmail.com
Mon Jul 4 21:31:14 MDT 2011
So...someone might be selling it for only the *accumulated* labor
power for it's use-value as opposed to the balanced exchange-value?
OK, so what? Marx throughout Capital 1 talks about the capitalist
selling a commodity for what he can get or lower than his competitor,
thus lowering the value of labor power in the commodity. He's talking
marco-economics using micro-economic place holders. He's not talking
*how* a commodity is sold...it stops at the distributor, so to speak,
that is the capitalist selling the commodity t0o...some entity
unnamed...be it the end user of C or a wholesaler of Cs.[He does make
a a difference between "Department 1" capitals....the sellers of
constant capital commodities: factories, machinery, etc and
"Department 2" capitals, the user of that constant capital that makes
commodities...bought by the workers of both Dept 1 and 2.]
If the sale doesn't go through, it means the exchange value is too
high and the capitalist is forced to either lay-off or lower the wages
of his variable capital or sell off some of his constant capital or
*lower his price* of C, thus reducing the amount of M (surplus value).
Marx didn't disagree with "supply" and "demand" (Adam Smith) but
*explains* it in terms of the labor theory of value, the theme of
which runs through out Capital. And it's to explain the *capitalism*
not the whys and hows of individual "capitals" OR "sellers".
More information about the Marxism