From: Ian Hunt (ian.hunt@FLINDERS.EDU.AU)
Date: Tue Jun 12 2007 - 23:43:30 EDT
Dear Howard, I infer from this, if I have understood your suggestion, that the sum in hours of labour of the proportions of the aggregate representing different labours, you will get a larger number of hours than the aggregate hours worked. This is a problem to me, Cheers, Ian >Hi Ian, > >I don't think so. You start with concrete labor. That's all there is. You >take the products of these separate concrete activities to market. Each >will represent a portion of the aggregate. Skilled labor of 2 hours, since >it is more intense than the average, will represent 8 hours of the >aggregate. And 9 hours of particularly unskilled labor may count for only 3 >hours of the aggregate. So now the 2 and 9 hours of concrete labor have >been objectified in products that represent 8 and 3 hours of abstract labor. >But all you have is one mass of labor of which different products represent >proportions. The aggregate equals the aggregate. There's nothing else that >figures in. > >Howard > > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Ian Hunt" <ian.hunt@FLINDERS.EDU.AU> >To: <OPE-L@SUS.CSUCHICO.EDU> >Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 8:25 PM >Subject: Re: [OPE-L] Complex ... and the French edition of capital > > >> I think it must be a bit more complicated than that. We might equate >> the total hours of abstract labour with the total hours of concrete >> labour, but when it comes to socially necessary abstract labour, >> which is what money expresses, if 8 hours of concrete skilled hours >> is four times as productive as 8 unskilled hours of the same kind of >> work, then the 8 hours of unskilled work will equal 2 hours of >> socially necessary abstract labour if the skilled work equals 8 hours >> of socially necessary abstract labour. >> A better way of determining the total amount of abstract labour in >> hours would be to take each kind of concrete labour-ie, labour >> producing a specific use value-and find the total of hours of work >> equal to the most productive hours worked (which is one conception of >> socially necessary abstract labour) or the total number of hours >> equal to the productivity of the work that earns the average return >> (another conception of socially necessary abstract labour as the >> labour of the market price setting technique of production). >> >> >By adding up the hours of work done, you'd be abstacting from other human >> >activities, etc., but you would not be abstracting from the activity of >> >labor. You would be counting hours of concrete labor. Still, I agree >with >> >your proposition because the totality of concrete labor is all there is >to >> >constitute abstract labor. Total concrete labor necessarily equals total >> >abstract labor. >> > >> >Howard >> > >> > >> >----- Original Message ----- >> >From: "Paul Cockshott" <wpc@DCS.GLA.AC.UK> >> >To: <OPE-L@SUS.CSUCHICO.EDU> >> >Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 4:12 PM >> >Subject: Re: [OPE-L] Complex ... and the French edition of capital >> > >> > >> >Michael >> >------- >> > >> >You could do that, but then you would be ignoring abstraction altogether. >> > >> > >> >On Tue, Jun 12, 2007 at 12:05:04AM +0100, Paul Cockshott wrote: >> >> Michael P >> >> >> >> What I meant was that it is hopeless to think that anyone could >> >> quantify the amount of abstract labor in an economy. >> >> ------------ >> >> Paul C >> >> >> >> Why not just add up the number of people who work then multiply by >> >> the fraction of the year that they each work? >> >> >> > >> > >> > >> >On the contrary I would be using abstraction, since I would by >> >adding up all the hours of work done, be abstracting from the concrete >> >form in which the work was done, and counting it only as human labour >> >in general --- in the abstract. >> > >> > >> >-- >> >Michael Perelman >> >Economics Department >> >California State University >> >Chico, CA 95929 >> > >> >Tel. 530-898-5321 >> >E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu >> >michaelperelman.wordpress.com >> >> >> -- >> Associate Professor Ian Hunt, >> Dept of Philosophy, School of Humanities, > > Director, Centre for Applied Philosophy, >> Flinders University of SA, >> Humanities Building, >> Bedford Park, SA, 5042, >> Ph: (08) 8201 2054 Fax: (08) 8201 2784 -- Associate Professor Ian Hunt, Dept of Philosophy, School of Humanities, Director, Centre for Applied Philosophy, Flinders University of SA, Humanities Building, Bedford Park, SA, 5042, Ph: (08) 8201 2054 Fax: (08) 8201 2784
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Jun 30 2007 - 00:00:04 EDT