This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
This section is horrendously biased and unless it is fixed I'm deleting it. --124.180.33.98 (talk) 11:59, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
I am probably not qualified to write this article, which deserves a great deal of care and thought as it is one of the cornerstones to Marxist theory. Sadly, this was lacking here (by no means an accusation, just an observation). Beginning with an intentional distortion by the first author, in his or her capacity of a troll. It then underwent several revisions, which while removing the obvious troll distortions, were all nonetheless inherently flawed. With my changes it remains a substub, I am hopeful that an economist or economic historian (which I am not) picks this up further. The changes I made are as follows:
As stated, I am hopeful that this article will be seriously contributed to by experts in the field. Surplus value is a concept that immeasurably influenced the lives of hunreds of million of people (USSR, PRoC, etc.) as it was a central consideration in the economic planning, policy, etc. (and, of course, the academic discipline of economics) in those countries. El_C
I suppose that at this point, it would be prudent of me to attempt an explanation of what it is beyond a single-sentence — involving a very brief exposition of absolute and relative surplus value. Also, merged with 'S-v' (redirected into 'S v'), while significantly editing and revising, and heavily rewording considerable portions of the former's content. As well, added image. No economic history however; as mentioned, my familiarity with that area of the topic is highly lacking. El_C
Thanks for your contributions, Mihnea Tudoreanu. I want to make it clear that I agree with you supplanting Marxist economics with Marxism. I kept the term from the earlier versions. Stating Marxism rather than redirecting to it via Marxist economics is, in fact, as a superior approach. Best regards, El_C
Should some mention be made of pre-MArxist use of surplius values? Adam Smith etc --Jacobin1949 (talk) 02:17, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
Perhaps we should opt for an article on "Surplus value (Marxism)" and another article "Surplus value (Islam)"? Or should the Islamic criticism be included in the current article? User: Jurriaan 20:30 1 February 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.136.223.40 (talk)
This section seems to be a criticism of Mandel's theories that includes no citations and is not labeled as a criticism section, nor does it address the question of the Theory of Surplus Value as it relates to taxation (instead only including criticism of Mandel's lack of addressing the issue). — Preceding unsigned comment added by KurtFF8 (talk • contribs) 02:41, 16 December 2012 (UTC)