This question <97|97> overall <96|98> Harmon: <649|102>.

Exam Question 227: The difference between the Money form (under the gold standard) and the General equivalent form is small; nevertheless it has important implications. Elaborate.

[97] Harmon: Money, Money, Money.   It is true that the Money form of commodity exchange and the General form of exchange differ only slightly. We have studied Marx's comparisons between 20 yards of linen, 1 coat, 10 lbs. of tea, etc, thus explaining the general form of exchange. In this adoption of 2 ounces of gold as another exchange value for 20 yards of linen, we see no change in the General form. The difference between this and the Money form is a “social implication”. When a society as a whole decided to make those quantities of gold equal to other commodities and use them universally as a form of trade, monetary exchange was born. In other words, now one commodity, gold, could be used as a quantitative object of trade for any other commodity. This beginning of monetary standardization held great consequences for future trade, as we can presently see in the everyday use of coin and dollars.

Hans: The General equivalent form and the Money form do not just differ by adding gold to the equivalents of wheat. Wheat has many equivalents only in the Expanded form. The General form is a reversion of the Expanded form. In the General form, commodities express their values in one equivalent, for instance linen. The Money form differs from the General form by the fact that everywhere and always this equivalent is the same commodity, gold. You are right that this has important social consequences. But the fact that money is used every day does not describe these consequences, because a General equivalent which is not money would also be used every day.

	Students enrolled for Econ 5080 in 2009fa are invited to give feedback to the above message Pseudonym:      UofU ID:   Text: