From: gerald_a_levy (gerald_a_levy@MSN.COM)
Date: Thu Nov 06 2003 - 12:45:59 EST
> What worries me is the mixed bag of criteria for deciding whether > employees are engaged in production or not. What is it about > these criteria that makes them criteria for deciding whether > labour is productive or not? I think that the relevant sense of > production here is surplus money-labour-value production. > For that, it is enough to be on the payroll in order to be > productive. I heard somewhere (probably on this list) that a > boss of US Steel once said 'US Steel does not make steel, it > makes money'. If, in its money making, US Steel sees fit to > employ security guards or corporate lawyers, that's good enough > for me. Hi again Phil. Capitalists typically put _themselves_ on payroll and pay themselves a salary as a reward for their "entrepreneurial ability". Does this then mean that they are productive of surplus value? _That_ worries me. In solidarity, Jerry
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 08 2003 - 00:00:00 EST