Question 1 What did Marx mean with his formu - University of Utah

U of Utah Econ 5080 2007fa 87
flashing was a signal of a special relationship between him and that specific person. He was
confused, however, when subsequent cars kept doing the same thing. It was after several
cars flashed their lights that he realized what had happened – his own lights were off. Hans
understood that the flashing did not signify a special relationship between him and the other
cars, but merely was the similar act of different cars telling him the same thing about himself.
It was something about Hans that caused the cars to flash, not a special relationship Hans
had with them.
This illustrates how Marx sees the joint work of other commodities (i.e. other cars) in expressing
the value (i.e. Hans’s lights off) of one commodity. For Marx, the exchange-value
is not determined by a special relationship between two goods. It is an exterior expression of
the congealed abstract labor in the commodity. It is imperative to understand that for Marx,
commodities don’t get value from each other. The market relations between commodities
merely give them a stage to showcase their intrinsic values. Deere [2002fa:75] explained
the joint work of the commodities using Marx’s theory of the Simple and Expanded form
of value. In the Simple form, all of the commodities align their value with a common commodity.
In Marx’s writings, he uses the gold standard as an example. Linen, wheat, iron and
all other commodities align their values against that of gold. Then this “commodity commonality”
becomes the measuring stick which expresses value in the world of commodities.
Hans [2003fa:117] further distinguishes this joint effort of selecting one use-value for all
commodities to express their value in from the separate work of each commodity to merely
express its value in some way. Moreover, as Neolib [2003fa:224-7] explains, the market of
exchange could not function without this joint work. “In order to facilitate exchange, it is
self-evident why commodities cannot express themselves on an individual basis. The market
demands a uniform commodity in which to express value in, as otherwise value would
become subjective.”
Hans: Excellent. But if all commodities express their values in a common commodity this is not the Simple form
of value but the General form of value.
Message [215] referenced by [226]. Next Message by Ricky is [226].
[224] Jill: In my first response to this question I was possibly too detailed in my example
and did not include the main point. The joint work of all commodities is necessary to
express the value of one commodity because they all must use the same value system. A
value must be placed on each commodity based on the materials and labor that went into
creating it. The society must have an agreed upon measure of worth in order for anything
to have an accurate value. For example, a society that chooses to measure the value of their
commodities in feathers would then have a standard item to relate the labor and material
cost to and commodities in that society would be exchanged much more fairly than another
society in which eggs may be valued in feathers but linen is valued in gold. There must be a
common measure for which all items are held accountable.
Next Message by Jill is [413].
[228] Jeff: In the original answer that was proposed on the exam, an incorrect approach
was taken to explain the concept of joint work on all commodities.
The core of this concept is that not everything can be equated, value wise, easily or at all.
Therefore, there must be one set commodity in which all things can be equated to. This set
commodity is called the general equivalent. So looking at the this scenario, the joint work is
88 2007fa Econ 5080 U of Utah
found in the efforts that are put into the commodity to make it what it is as well as the general
equivalent itself. This is due to the key component of the argument that it is necessary to
have one centralized unit of comparison to be able to properly assess value relative to other
commodities. Therefore, with the central unit of measure and having all other commodities
compared to this one general equivalent, one would be able to see the joint work that is
required to be able to properly asses the value of a commodity.
This analysis is the correct one of the concept of joint work to properly express the value
of one commodity. It is based on centralizing the measurement of value to one commodity
and having all other commodities compared to it. When this is done, joint work of all the
commodities allows for a proper valuation of a commodity.
Next Message by Jeff is [410].
[234] Nogi: Joint work for value of one. Marx seems to equate this question to the
amount of labor put into the joint commodities in order to express the value of one commodity.
In the example Marx uses he says the commodities not only qualitatively equal as values
in general but also as values whose quanities can be compared. What I think he meant in
regaurds to this question is that the value can be determined by the labor put in to produce
the commodity but all the joint commodities will have varying degrees of value because different
amounts of labor was put into them. Therefore this must be taken into account when
determining the value of one commodity from its joint commodities.
Hans: Wrong. Marx is discussion the expression of value, not its determination. There are a number of answers
like yours in the archives, and I always comment that they are wrong.
Next Message by Nogi is [349].
[235] Amy: Expression of all commodities values by one commodity. In order to
exchange a commodity, one must first recognize the value of the commodity. In the simple
form of value one recognizes that 20 yards of linen is worth 1 coat. This establishes that 20
yards of linen has the same value (abstract labor) as 1 coat. Then to progress to the expanded
form of value one has to recognize not only is 20 yards of linen = 1 coat but that it is also
equal to 10 lbs. tea or = 40 lbs. coffee or = 1 quarter of wheat or = 2 oz. of gold or = 1/2 ton
of iron or = etc. (Capital, p 155) The joint work of all commodities establishes the general
form of value where X amount of Commodity A = W amount of Commodity B and Z amount
of Commodity C also = X amount of Commodity A. All commodities have to first express
their value in the simple form before they can express their value in the expanded form.
Once all commodities have been expressed in expanded form then they all have to agree
on one commodity that will represent them all. One would want to choose a commodity
that has consistent quality and quantity, for example gold. Different amounts of gold equal
different amounts of different commodities. It takes the joint work of all commodities to
determine a general expression because all commodities have to express their value in that
said commodity and every new commodity that comes onto the market must also express
their value in that commodity. By having one commodity that expresses the value of all
other commodities it makes it easier to compare the value of commodities.
Hans: You are not making it clear enough that the transition from the expanded to the general form of value
implies a reversal. Expressing the value of my commodity in all other commodities (one in relative form, many in
equivalent form) is not the same as expressing all commodities in one general equivalent (many in relative form,
one in equivalent form).
Next Message by Amy is [269].