From: Michael Perelman (michael@ECST.CSUCHICO.EDU)
Date: Tue Apr 10 2007 - 11:56:43 EDT
I know that you are a serious empirical scholar, but in the US, professions staffed by women tend to pay less than those typically staffed by men. If market prices are good enough to measure value, why not just use market prices & forget about value? On Tue, Apr 10, 2007 at 04:35:26PM +0100, Paul Cockshott wrote: > I have done it in two ways. > > In case 1 I assume that wages have already equated different levels of > skill and just divide the > wage bill of each industry by the national average wage. > > In more detailed calculations I have used sources other than the I/O > tables to obtain > hourly wage rates for each industry and then worked back from the wage > bill of each > industry to the hours actually worked. In this case one is saying that > even if one > industry has more skilled labour than another we are treating an hour in > each industry > as being the same - ie, we are trying to go back to clock hours. > > -----Original Message----- > From: OPE-L [mailto:OPE-L@SUS.CSUCHICO.EDU] On Behalf Of Michael > Perelman > Sent: 10 April 2007 16:32 > To: OPE-L@SUS.CSUCHICO.EDU > Subject: Re: [OPE-L] The Use-Value & SNLT Question > > How in the world do you measure SNLT in practice? Do you take wage > rates as an > indicator of multiples of abstract labor? Do blacks or women represent > less SNLT? > > Or do you just assume that all hours of labor are equal? > -- > Michael Perelman > Economics Department > California State University > Chico, CA 95929 > > Tel. 530-898-5321 > E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu > michaelperelman.wordpress.com -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu michaelperelman.wordpress.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Apr 30 2007 - 00:00:16 EDT