From: Michael Williams (michaelj.williams@TISCALI.CO.UK)
Date: Mon Nov 24 2003 - 06:55:12 EST
An interesting thread, but I am puzzled by Paul C's implicit definition of productive labour: > > Paul: > > Who benefits from the labour spent on advertising and in finance? > It is pretty clearly not the classically defined productive > working class, and as such it looks like exploitation to me. [Michael Williams] How does this reconcile with the key characteristic of productive labour in CMP: that it is productive of surplus-value (which is, of course, based on exploitation)? michael
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Nov 25 2003 - 00:00:01 EST