Dear Rakesh, Sorry to cause you trouble but could you give me chapter and verse on this with respect to Grossman. Thanks Paul Bullock ----- Original Message ----- From: "Rakesh Bhandari" <rakeshb@stanford.edu> To: <ope-l@galaxy.csuchico.edu> Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 3:12 AM Subject: [OPE-L:6853] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: surplus value, commercial workers and merchant capital (fwd) > re 6851 > > >Re [6880]: > > > >Ian wrote: > > > >> I agree that some slave owners (especially the slave owners of > >> the new world) have appropriated surplus value (this was said in > >> one of the opening comments of this thread, I think), > > > >Rakesh replied: > > > >> yes but Jerry does not agree with us. > > > >On the contrary, I have never disputed the claim that slave owners > >can _appropriate_ surplus value. That was never in dispute. > > > >In solidarity, Jerry > > Again Jerry this is cleary not my claim. Ian may or may not be > agreeing with me--I will let him clarify. He seemed to be agreeing > with me and thus not using "appropriate" in the sense of claiming > surplus value produced by other capitals employing formally free wage > labor for the production of commodities. > > At any rate, I have clearly argued that formally unfree workers can > *themselves produce surplus value*. You seem to dispute that. Brass > does not; neither does Banaji (and Henryk Grossman and Rosa Luxemburg > by the way). Patrick Mason does not. It seems to me that Paulo C does > not either. I am sure there are people on this list who agree with > you. Perhaps Ian does. I am not clear as to who they are and more > importantly what their (or for that matter your) reasons are for > dismissing the possibility that formally unfree workers can ever > produce surplus value. > > Perhaps you could give a brief account of the reasoning behind your > negative dismissal? > > Thanks, Rakesh > >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu May 02 2002 - 00:00:08 EDT