John quoted Gil in 5450 (I think this is Gil speaking): > >My comment was that increasing labor intensity would in any case reduce >necessary labour, by reducing the labor time necessary to produce the wage >bundle; and that changing the prevailing level of labor intensity might >also change the levels of surplus labor or the wage bundle for the reasons >mentioned; but there's no other apparent avenue by which changing labor >intensity would affect the above ratio. Gil, I think if we understand increased intensity as a defacto extension of the working day, then it's clear that intensification does not reduce necessary labor time (relative surplus value) but increases surplus labor time over and above the constant necessary labor time (absolute surplus value). In other words, I am asking whether intensification is best understood in terms of an increase in absolute surplus value (lengthening of the working day)rather than in relative surplus value (reduction of necessary labor time). Again I think Geoffrey Kay makes some provocative comments about this in his Economic theory of the Working Class. Rakesh
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Wed May 02 2001 - 00:00:06 EDT