Marx and Ricardo
The different organic compositions of capital of different branches of industry raised a problem for the classical economic schema of David Ricardo and others, who could not reconcile their labor-cost theory of price with the existence of differences in the OCC between sectors. The latter imply different profit rates in different industries. Also, while market competition would establish a ruling price level for a type of output, different enterprises would use more or less labour to produce it. For these reasons, values produced and prices realised by different producers would quantitatively diverge.
Marx either solved this problem with his theory of prices of production and the tendency for profitability differentials to be levelled out through competition, or he failed to solve it, according to which side of the debate over the transformation problem one finds convincing.
Others see this "problem" (the development of a mathematical relationship between prices and labor-values) as a false one, rejecting the idea that Marx aimed to use his labor theory value to understand relative prices. Here the argument is that he aimed to reveal only the social nature or "deep structure" of capitalist society.
In a third interpretation, Marx aspired both to relate values and prices, and offer a social critique, because both of these were necessary to make his case truly convincing. Here, the separate concepts of product-values and product-prices are regarded as essential for a theory of market dynamics and capitalist competition; it is argued that price behaviour in aggregate cannot be understood or theorised about at all without reference to value-relations, explicitly or implicitly.
Read more about this topic: Organic Composition Of Capital
Famous quotes containing the word marx:
“Strange is the influence of Marx on character.”
—Christina Stead (19021983)