From: ope-admin@ricardo.ecn.wfu.edu
Date: Tue May 16 2006 - 23:18:23 EDT
----- Original Message ----- From: 이채언 Sent: Tuesday, May 16, 2006 10:55 PM Subject: [RE]Re: [OPE-L] PUPL and the total profit/total surplus value identity Marx argues that the workers give free credit to the capitalist! If a capitalist starts his business with borrowed money, does he advance nothing at all? Chai-on --------------------------------------- [ Original Message ] -------------------------------------- Sender : Jerry Levy < Gerald_A_Levy@MSN.COM > Date : 2006-05-17 05:23:43 S u b j e c t : Re: [OPE-L] PUPL and the total profit/total surplus value identity > You suggest: There is support in Marx for the idea that these [salaries of > non-productive labor] are advanced, I think. After all, if the wages for > productive workers are advanced (i.e. V is advanced) then why not also for > the wages of unproductive workers? > My reply is that Marx's basic principle is that the wages are mainly *not* > "advanced", i.e. the worker contracts to work first, and gets paid later. Jurriaan, V and C are *advanced* in Marx's theory to the extent that --within period analysis -- money to purchase means of production and labour power is assumed to be spent before production in the new period can commence. I.e. in the formula M - C {MP, LP} ... (P) .... C' - M' M - C happens before P. Of course, Marx was aware that the wages of workers are not, _in practice_, (generally) advanced. In claiming that money capital for V is advanced I think he was making a simplifying assumption. I'm still thinking about the rest of your post. In solidarity, Jerry
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed May 31 2006 - 00:00:03 EDT