I always read the reproduction schemes as a sort of impossibility theorem (or at least improbability theorem) for capitalism achieving an equilibrium.
I also enjoy how, 100 pages or so in, he shifts from the sequential labor perspective of vol. 1 (hay => cows => leather => shoes) to the simultaneous perspective that he got from Hodgskin. On Fri, Dec 14, 2007 at 11:03:07AM -0800, Jim Devine wrote: > it's ironic that the most boring and least edited part of CAPITAL > would be attractive. This book deserves more attention, however: it > represents part of Marx's disaggregation process (and movement from > the abstract to the concrete) going from volume I's abstract capital > vs. abstract labor vision. > -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu michaelperelman.wordpress.com
