From: Philip Dunn (hyl0morph@YAHOO.CO.UK)
Date: Fri Jan 11 2008 - 17:13:16 EST
On Fri, 2008-01-11 at 21:02 +0100, Jurriaan Bendien wrote: .... > Ironically, the same authors who argue that the wages of unproductive > workers are a "deduction from surplus value" (which is actually > literally an expression Marx uses in his manuscript) include those > wages as a portion of surplus value, in their social account of gross > product (e.g. Shaikh & Tonak, Moseley). > .... Domestic service as unproductive labour is uncontested (AFAIK). However, in this case, no question of addition or subtraction arises. The wages of the capitalist's domestic servants are paid out of surplus value, but do not reduce or increment surplus value in any way. The capitalist simply chooses to spend income in this way. I have never understood quite why it is thought that any capitalist businesses are unproductive or that there can be some unproductive waged workers employed in such businesses. Is the PA who buys the birthday present for the boss's wife unproductive in that activity? ___________________________________________________________ Inbox full of spam? Get leading spam protection and 1GB storage with All New Yahoo! Mail. http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Jan 31 2008 - 00:00:06 EST