>
>The direct labor that can be categorized as variable capital plus surplus
>value is only the labor that performed on the labor-objects (not on the
>instruments of the work). If this can be accepted, then we can say, although
>it is the laborer that repairs the machines, its wage cannot be a part of
>variable capital. (please see my reply to Jerry's 3830)
>
Why should we accept this? Does a worker who recharges an instrument of
labour eg, fills a paint gun, work on the instrument and not on the object?
Does a worker who programs a CAD tool work on the instrument and not on the
object? This is a pointless distinction, so far as I can see. It is at odds
with the notion of the collective labourer which is at the centre of Marx's
analysis of capitalist production.