From: Michael Williams (michaelj.williams@TISCALI.CO.UK)
Date: Fri Dec 12 2003 - 17:37:50 EST
So since no pure capitalist economy exists, there can be no empirical data that is directly germane, ... Or? michael > -----Original Message----- > From: OPE-L [mailto:OPE-L@SUS.CSUCHICO.EDU] On Behalf Of Paul > Cockshott > Sent: Friday, December 12, 2003 9:54 PM > To: OPE-L@SUS.CSUCHICO.EDU > Subject: Re: (OPE-L) Re: the real wage, and the production of > surplus value > > > From the standpoint of F&M s analysis they assume > a fully capitalist economy and are only interested > in the wage/profit share within the capitalist sector > of the economy. > > Thus the proportion of small farmers, small shopkeepers > etc, whilst they affect wage share of the national income > do not affect the wage to profit share. Thus the issue > of the share of the wage workers in total population is > not germane. > > gerald_a_levy wrote: > > > > Paul C wrote: > > > > > As a share of the national income yes. > > > > Wasn't that what we were talking about? > > > > If the size of the (wage-) working population is a crucial > variable in > > determining the wage share of national income, we should be talking > > about the determinants of the size of the (wage-) working > population. > > > > In solidarity, Jerry > > > > > Paul C: It seems to me that the *size of the (wage-) working > > > population* as a percent of the total population must, from a > > > theoretical and historical perspective, be a crucial variable in > > > determining the wage share of national income. Don't you agree? >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Dec 16 2003 - 00:00:00 EST