A Critique of Moseley's <i>Money and Totality</i>
<p class="first" id="d55338e84">In his macro-monetary interpretation of Marx's theory of value, Fred Moseley claims that Marx's prices of production should be considered as the long-run equilibrium condition of capital reproduction under th...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Pluto Journals
2021-03-01
|
| Series: | World Review of Political Economy |
| Online Access: | https://www.scienceopen.com/hosted-document?doi=10.13169/worlrevipoliecon.12.1.0106 |
| Summary: | <p class="first" id="d55338e84">In his macro-monetary interpretation of Marx's theory of value, Fred Moseley claims
that Marx's prices of production should be considered as the long-run equilibrium
condition of capital reproduction under the assumption of given technology and given
capital distribution. Moseley's methodological interpretation depends on the claim
that the general rate of profit is completely predetermined in the first two volumes
of
<i>Capital.</i> I argue to the contrary that though Moseley shows the inadequacy of the Standard
Interpretation, he fails to provide a convincing description of Marx's category of
prices of production. The production of the new total value and total surplus-value
cannot be considered as simply determined by the initial conditions of production;
if we want to describe how prices of production are formed and the role they play
in the social reproduction of capital, we should recognize that in social reproduction
this process develops temporally through an intertwined relation between the production,
circulation and distribution.
</p> |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2042-891X 2042-8928 |