Programs
For the entire programs including Japanese-language sessions, please see the Japanese website.
For the entire programs including Japanese-language sessions, please see the Japanese website.
Faculty of Economics Building, 1st floor, Lecture Room 2
Chair: Takashi Ohno［Doshisha University］
Ellis Scharfenaker［University of Utah］
"A Statistical Equilibrium Approach to Adam Smith’s Labor Theory of Value"
Commentator: Kazuhiro Kurose（Tohoku University）
TYangyuzi Wang［Tohoku University］
"A Neo-Austrian Analytical Framework of Marx's Double Crisis Theory as An Out-of-Equilibrium Process"
Commentator: Soh Kaneko（Tokyo Metropolitan University）
Hiroto Noda［Doshisha University(graduate)］
"Social Preferences, Kantian Behavior, and Strategic Incentives in Team Production"
Commentator: Naoki Yoshihara（The University of Massachusetts Amherst）
Faculty of Economics Building, 1st floor, Lecture Room 2
Chair: Hideto Akashi [Komazawa University]
Niall Reddy［Wits University]
"“Downsize and distribute” or “merge and monopolize”: a critique of corporate financialization theories"
Commentator: Neus Tarazón Marí［University of València]
Neus Tarazón Marí［University of València]
"Equilibrium as Ideology: Tracing the Conceptual Dematerialization of Economic Theory"
Commentator: Niall Reddy［Wits University]
Kitan Hall
Summary: Marx’s theory that the origin of money surplus value (profits, rent and interest) in capitalist commodity-producing economies is the exploitation of productive labor is often dismissed on the ground that it holds only when money prices of produced commodities are proportional to their embodied socially necessary labor times as would be the case if the division of labor were organized by independent producers who own or produce their own means of production. We argue in contrast that because Marx derives his theory of exploitation from the long-period method adopted by Adam Smith, when commodity production is organized by capitalists who own the means of production and hire workers for a money wage, workers’ and capitalists claims to the net product are proportional whether or not they are evaluated at prices proportional to the socially necessary labor time embodied in the commodities. The literature on the transformation problem has missed this conclusion due to its failure to take the net product as well as the money wage or the profit rate as given.