From: GERALD LEVY (gerald_a_levy@MSN.COM)
Date: Mon Dec 03 2007 - 08:29:21 EST
That is a very easy point to grasp. Sraffa's analysis of capitalism holds for w (wages) greater than 0. However, we may step outside capitalism to look at what holds when w=0, just as when studying physical motion, we may step outside the motion of bodies subject to friction on inclined planes by looking, as Galileo did, at the case where friction = 0. That too, is a not so simple but still relatively easy point, I think, Hi Ian: Examining the case where friction equals zero is perfectly valid because their can be settings (including a vacuum) where it exists. It is not merely an empty abstraction completely removed from an analysis of the real subject matter. Stepping outside capitalism is legitimate, of course, if you want to develop a trans-historical theory that can be applied to analyze non-capitalist modes of production (real or imagined; on Earth or elsewhere in the Universe). If that is the case, then go ahead and assume that w = 0. If it is intended to be part of a (Marxian or non-Marxian) analysis of capitalism, then there are insurmountable obstacles. For instance, under capitalism, what is the intensity of labor consistent with the assumption of V = 0? What are the implications of the length of the working day if V = 0? If "wage-workers live on air" why would they work at all? Wouldn't they be better off being part of the industrial reserve army? Unless there was a severe labor shortage, why would "capitalists" seek to increase relative surplus value through technological change? Questions like this arise because the limit case is outside of the legitimate parameters of the subject matter. In solidarity, Jerry
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Dec 31 2007 - 00:00:04 EST