[ show plain text ]
Re Rakesh's [OPE-L:2911]:
The government uses the criteria of *income* as a proxy for "class".
Thus, "middle class" is defined in terms of income. This is the
"formalistic" criteria that is used by the government. The government
*certainly* does not use the criteria of "ownership and control of
the means of production".
Thus, when you highlight the hourly net income received by self-
employed truckers who own their own rigs, you are using the
government's criteria of income to establish class.
It is, of course, true that there are truckers who are wage-earners
who are employed by capitalists and their are truckers who are
"independent contractors" (i.e. they own their own rig and are self-
employed), but this is not a inconsequential "formalistic" difference
when it comes to comprehending class. Similarly, there are
agricultural proletarians employed by capital who sometimes engage
in the production of the same commodities as land-owning peasants.
Indeed, it is often the case -- as with truck drives -- that the waged-
workers receive more income than their petty-bourgeois counter-
parts. Whether a truck driver earns $8/hr. or $50/hr is besides the
point, however.
btw, I wonder: do you know how much money is required (though
savings and/or loan) to buy a large trucking rig?
In solidarity, Jerry
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Apr 30 2000 - 19:59:44 EDT