While re-reading Vol 1, Ch 7, Section 2 in connection with another thread, I noticed the following that has significance for this thread: (From the paragraph that begins: "Moreover, the time spent in production counts only in so far as it is socially necessary for the production of a use-value"): "Lastly -- and for this purpose our friend (the capitalist, JL) has a penal code of his own -- all wasteful consumption of raw material or instruments of labour is strictly forbidden, because what is wasted in this way represents a superfluous expenditure of quantities of objectified labour that does not count in the product or enter into its value." (Penguin ed, 303). Note, however, that before the raw materials and instruments of labour can be set in motion in the labour process they must first be purchased with money-capital. I.e. they have value when entering the production process, but if there is then a violation of the capitalist "penal code" and are consumed wastefully, then there is a *loss of value*. In other words, the value of the means of production are not fully transferred to the commodity product in the course of production: thus value itself is being *wasted*. Expressing the matter differently: the value of the means of production can be *potentially* transferred to the commodity product but there is the distinct possibility (as I suggested in a previous post last week on "capacity utilization" and as I suggest above) that a portion of that value can be "lost" or "wasted" rather then being transferred. In solidarity, Jerry
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon Apr 02 2001 - 09:57:29 EDT