| This question <55|65> overall <59|61> Hans: <58|61>. |
| Question 147: What is the progress of the Money form as compared to the General Equivalent form? |
| [60] Hans: Progression from Simple form of value to the Money form PowderNow [55] gives an overview of the whole progression from the Simple form of value to the Money form. |
| Actually I wanted you to tell me only why the small step from the Universal Equivalent form to the Money form matters, but it may not have been clear from the Annotations that the General Equivalent form is the same as the Universal Equivalent form. Therefore I will let PowderNow's interpretation of the Question stand. I may even ask you in the exam to give me a brief survey of this whole development. |
| It is a big question, and I expect only a rough answer. PowderNow got the big outlines right. There are four steps: Simple form, Expanded form, Universal form, and Money form. |
| About the Simple form PowderNow writes: |
| If 20 yards of linen exchange for one coat, we have a relation which is the simple form of the expression of value. |
| This simplest value relation in not yet an expression of value, but it contains an expression of value. In order to see how this relation contains an expression of value, we have to look at it from the point of view of one of the traders, here the linen weaver. This is why Marx's Simple form of value is asymmetric. |
| Now PowderNow continues: |
| This simple form of value quickly develops into the expanded form of value. |
| “Quickly” is not a bad word here. Marx writes “by an easy transition” or “automatically” (in German “von selbst”). What is this easy transition? The linen weaver needs more than coats to live, therefore she exchanges her linen not only for coats but also for many other things. This gives the Expanded form of value, which PowderNow describes correctly: |
| One commodity, the linen, is now equated to the whole range of other commodities, each of them expressing its value. 20 yards of linen= 1 coat or = 10 pounds of tea or = 40 lb. of coffee or = etc. |
| Then PowderNow notes a “defect” of the Expanded form: |
| But the expanded form is not closed because other commodities can be added to the group. |
| The Expanded form has some good parts too where it is a better expression of value than the Simple form. But it has the above and additionally some other defects; therefore it can only be a transitional form, and the next step is the General or Universal form of value. |
| The linen can develop into the general form of value, in which it serves as a measure of the value of all the other commodities. The linen has now become the general equivalent measure of value of all the other commodities. |
| What PowderNow fails to say here is that the linen has switched sides. Before, it was on the left side of the equation, and now it is on the right side. Before, the linen weaver expressed the value of linen in all other commodities, and now all other producers express the value of their commodities in linen. This requires coordination by everyone, they have to agree on which commodity they use to express their values, but if for instance the linen is a central commodity which many others have to buy often, then this can be achieved. |
| And now the transition to the money form: |
| This general equivalent brings us close to the money form of value, but any commodity could be the general equivalent. The full money form of value occurs when some commodity or some abstract unit of account becomes socially accepted as the general equivalent and is commonly used as the measure value of commodities. |
| This seems such a small step, and if someone wants to explain why this makes a difference, please go ahead; this was the original intent of this Question. |
|
|
|||||