>John says: > >I am simply saying that quantities of abstract labor are known only via the >prices. >________________________ >How? That is my simple question. > >Cheers, ajit sinha Fair enough. Take a price, assign an amount of abstract labor to it, calculate the labor/price ratio, convert all other prices using that ratio. You can then see everything in terms of abstract labor if you wish. I am assuming no money commodity. Should there be one, assing an amount of abstract labor to an amount of that commodity, calulate the labor/price ratio, convert all other prices using that ratio. John E. ________________________________ Now, this is too complicated for me to even understand. But let me take a stab. You say, "take a price", since price is a ratio, it would be something like: x ounce of silver/unit of A. Now, which one should I assign an *arbitrary* labor-time to? x ounce of silver or one unit of A? If I assign the arbitrary labor-time to x ounce of silver, then our price ratio turns into: l hrs. of labor-time/unit of A. Now, you say take labor/price ratio. So the labor/price ratio would turn into: (l hrs. of labor/l hrs. of labor) x one unit of A. Which is equal to one unit of A, which tells us nothing. So now, let's assign the *arbitrary* amount of labor-time to one unit of A. Now, the price ratio turns into: (x ounce of silver)/(l hrs. of labor). Now you say, "take labor/price ratio. So in this case we get: (l hrs. of labor) square/(x ounce of silver). May be this is a good place I should give up. Cheers, ajit sinha
