From: Paul Cockshott (wpc@DCS.GLA.AC.UK)
Date: Fri Nov 07 2003 - 05:22:44 EST
-----Original Message----- From: OPE-L [mailto:OPE-L@SUS.CSUCHICO.EDU] On Behalf Of gerald_a_levy Sent: 06 November 2003 16:07 To: OPE-L@SUS.CSUCHICO.EDU Subject: (OPE-L) indirect labor, the real wage, and the production of surplus value Paul C wrote: > This relates to prices not to values. A fall in the price of oil would > just be a redistribution of value between property owners unless it was > brought about by a change in the production technology. So a fall in the price of oil couldn't have the indirect effect of altering real wages? ------------------- clearly it could, but of course what we are concerned with here is not an increase in real wages, but a fall in the value of labour power, real wages remaining constant. Oil is a special case since it is typically sold above its value, thus there is the opportunity to lower oil prices towards their values by 'non-economic' means. But this is not relevant to value theory. ------------------------------------------------ Are you assuming that real wages can only change when there has been a change in labor productivity? In solidarity, Jerry ------------------------------------------------ Clearly not. They can rise due to class struggle as well. But from the standpoint of the theory of relative surplus value, one assumes real wages are constant and looks at the effect on aggregate surplus value of improvements in technology.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 08 2003 - 00:00:00 EST