Re Charlie's [5483]: > Price, however, is exchange value, not value. > The working- class consumers have no more > value (received as money wages) to > give back to the capitalist class than they did > prior to the success of the marketing campaign. Right ... unless over the long-term these goods become identified as being 'necessary' by the working-class and therefore the 'cultural' and 'moral' component of the wage increases. This, of course, would entail working-class struggles for higher wages and the success or failure of those wage struggles is not pre- determined. > Has the exchange value of money changed? Perhaps. The increase in prices by oligopolies might have caused average prices to increase and therefore brought about (profit-push) inflation. > Has the money wage changed? Not necessarily (although, of course, workers can fight for higher wages to make up for their declining real wages.) > Have the hours of labor performed > by the working class > changed? If not, then the rate of exploitation and > the mass of > surplus value have not changed. Right. Now consider two additional possibilities: 1) Suppose, though, that by virtue of previous struggles, the cultural and moral component of the wage has increased to the point where workers are normally able to save a proportion of their money wages. That is, after all, a pretty realistic possibility for advanced capitalist economies, including the U.S. Now suppose that oligopolies have increased the prices for goods destined for working-class consumption such that the bundle of goods purchased by workers is purchased at prices significantly higher than values. The result must under these conditions be a declining standard of living for workers even where the money wage has remained constant. So -- you're right -- the rate and mass of surplus value along with the hours of labor have not changed -- but the money wage which customarily purchased a certain quantity of commodities is now able to exchange against less commodities. 2) Suppose, as above, that there is a 'cultural' and 'moral' component of the wage that is such that workers have been able to have savings. Now suppose that they finance the additional expenditures on commodities sold by oligopolies through credit-card borrowing. The result would then be, assuming a given money wage, at best a decline of workers' savings or at worst negative savings (i.e. debt) for working-class families. Suppose the latter. In that case, again, the standard of living of workers has gone down, right? > On their side, the workers are well aware of > how much stuff they > create, how much effort it takes them to do it, > and how much they > consume. These facts hold regardless of whether > the prices of > commodities are equal to their value..." (From Capitalism to > Equality, p. 101-2, Web URL below.) I'm not convinced that is the case. Had it been the case then it is unlikely that credit card debt for working-class families would have reached the height that it has. One has to consider, also, the nature of the advertising and marketing campaigns by the oligopolies. Rather than assume that consumer preferences are given and are exogenous (as in the marginalist perspective on consumer sovereignty), oligopolies understand that they can manufacture wants and desires and 'needs' by working-class consumers! Workers are *not* in general aware of the extent to which advertising plays with their heads. Indeed, in entire branches of production (e.g. in the personal care sector), the whole point of the advertising is to create a fear -- indeed a *neurosis* -- that didn't previously exist. It is in the nature of neurosis that those who suffer from those complexes don't generally recognize it for what it is. > This is only the first instance. Moving from the > first instance > to a final result proceeds through workers' consciousness and > class struggle. Many similar phenomena of price > -- the tripled > price of the oligopoly commodity at issue here, > general > inflation, and the current price gouging for > electricity and > natural gas in California -- affect the standard of l> living. Right. > Workers know whether their wages have held > up or not. As > individuals they may try to find a second job, or > as a family the > spouse may re-enter the labor force, or sections > of the working > class may put more energy into the class struggle. I think that you are making the assumptions of economic rationality and perfect information here. Working-class behavior in the marketplace and elsewhere is not always rational nor do they have perfect information about the marketplace. > There is no > formula by which to calculate what happens in going from the > first instance to the final result. Agreed. In solidarity, Jerry > Web site for my [Charlie's, JL] book is at > http://www.LaborRepublic.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Jun 02 2001 - 00:00:06 EDT