Re: [OPE-L] Why aren't non-labourers sources of value?

From: Paul Cockshott (wpc@DCS.GLA.AC.UK)
Date: Thu Apr 14 2005 - 09:46:15 EDT

• Next message: Rakesh Bhandari: "Re: [OPE-L] Why aren't non-labourers sources of value? creativity"
• Previous message: Paul Cockshott: "[OPE-L] Money in China and Europe"
• Maybe in reply to: Gerald_A_Levy@MSN.COM: "Re: [OPE-L] Why aren't non-labourers sources of value?"
• Next in thread: Christopher Arthur: "Re: [OPE-L] Why aren't non-labourers sources of value? creativity"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

The reason why animals were not as influential
in determining exchange value as human labour, 
despite the necessity of both in pre-steam engine
times, comes down to universality.

We are universal robots, horses are not, they can
pull loads and that is it. Humans can do any work
and thus their labour enters into all production
processes.

• Next message: Rakesh Bhandari: "Re: [OPE-L] Why aren't non-labourers sources of value? creativity"
• Previous message: Paul Cockshott: "[OPE-L] Money in China and Europe"
• Maybe in reply to: Gerald_A_Levy@MSN.COM: "Re: [OPE-L] Why aren't non-labourers sources of value?"
• Next in thread: Christopher Arthur: "Re: [OPE-L] Why aren't non-labourers sources of value? creativity"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Apr 15 2005 - 00:00:02 EDT