From: Paul Cockshott (clyder@GN.APC.ORG)
Date: Mon Dec 08 2003 - 16:08:51 EST
It tends to be of the order of 50%, why not 1% or 99%. If we dont have a general theory that can explain a basic and consistent feature of capitalism we are not doing well. We could relegate this to conjunctural factors, but that would be a copout like explaining the existence of profit by 'conjunctural factors'. glevy@PRATT.EDU wrote: > > Paul C wrote: > > > [...]I do think we > > need an explanation of the relatively stable > > wage share in national incomes. [...] > > Is that explanation, though, to be found through 'basic > theory' or through conjunctural and class analysis? > > As an empirical and historical matter, how 'stable' is > that share -- and over what time period -- when > put in the context of the international capitalist > economy rather than individual capitalist social formations? > > In solidarity, Jerry
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Dec 09 2003 - 00:00:01 EST