[OPE-L:8323] Re: RE: Re: Re: Electronics and Value

From: clyder@gn.apc.org
Date: Mon Jan 13 2003 - 04:28:21 EST

Next message: Michael Eldred: "[OPE-L:8324] Re: 'Gewinnst' from the standpoint of the working class?"
Previous message: Paul Zarembka: "[OPE-L:8322] Re: Re: Re: Milios et al, "Karl Marx and the Classics""
In reply to: Chai-on Lee: "[OPE-L:8319] RE: Re: Re: Electronics and Value"
Next in thread: gerald_a_levy: "[OPE-L:8320] Re: Electronics and Value"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

Quoting Chai-on Lee <conlee@chonnam.ac.kr>:

> 
> Clyder said:
> 
> > Do they really employ nobody? No repair staff, no computer operators
> > and programmers?
> 
> 
> But the repair staff, computer operators and programmers do not belong to the
> category of direct labor.
> They all belong to that of indirect labor. 
> A criterion between direct and indirect labor is that one increases in
> proportion to the volume of output products while the other dores not.
> 
> 
> Chai-on 
> 
> 
Fair enough, but apply that to the printing industry and most labour
becomes indirect.

Next message: Michael Eldred: "[OPE-L:8324] Re: 'Gewinnst' from the standpoint of the working class?"
Previous message: Paul Zarembka: "[OPE-L:8322] Re: Re: Re: Milios et al, "Karl Marx and the Classics""
In reply to: Chai-on Lee: "[OPE-L:8319] RE: Re: Re: Electronics and Value"
Next in thread: gerald_a_levy: "[OPE-L:8320] Re: Electronics and Value"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Jan 14 2003 - 00:00:01 EST