From: Gerald_A_Levy@MSN.COM
Date: Tue Dec 14 2004 - 21:44:41 EST
> > You seem > > prepared to accept someone who is unemployed as part of the working > > class. > > So, does that person leave the working class when she gets some money > > eg., from a family member) or some credit (high interest rate) to > > purchase > > some shirts from a capitalist firm that she can sell on the street? > > Recognizing that this person would much prefer to be getting a regular > > wage (even a piece-wage) for selling the shirts, to be covered by the > > law, be eligible for pensions, medical care, etc rather than bear the > > risk. > Is this person part of the proletariat? Michael L, You're not filling-in many of the details, are you? It's interesting to note, for instance, that in your hypothetical instance the person does not own means of production. To answer your question: If the scale of the activity is small, if she/he does not employ (and exploit) anyone, *and* if this is a SHORT-TERM, TEMPORARY way to make ends meet then, yes, she/he would remain within the working class. Now you can answer a question of mine: If someone in the informal sector borrows money to produce (obviously with means of production and labor) and sell shirts to working-class families, does not consider her- or himself to be a worker (but rather a poor, self-employed person), has never been a wage-worker, doesn't expect to become a wage- worker, relates to wage-workers as consumers, and has done this activity (along with her or his children and, now, grandchildren) for the last 50 years, is she or he a member of the working-class? If so, why? In solidarity, Jerry
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Dec 16 2004 - 00:00:00 EST