But marginalists since Jevons have claimed that the labor affects the value of a commodity only to the extent that the commodity becomes scarce - a commodity that can be produced in 5 days will be more scarce that one produced in 1 hour. Neoclassical economic theory claims to discover universal economic rules and thus diregards whether the costs of production are born by labor or some natural force. What for Marxism only appears as a relationship between things is really a relationship between things for the Marginalist because natural scarcity not a social relation. What is Marxism's objection to this characterization of value? (Here's what Lionel Robbins says economics is about:
"Human behavior as a relationship between ends and scarce means that have alternative uses". cit in Sweezy, Theoy of Capitalist Development.)
Could anyone suggest works (preferably from Marxian perspective) that deal with this issue very plainly? (I'm reading the hilferding/bohm-bawerk debate - difficult for the amateur. Where does Marx deal with this in Capital? )
Thank You,
Jon
Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Make PC-to-Phone Calls to the US (and 30+ countries) for 2ยข/min or less.
