In message Fri, 25 Apr 1997 12:43:45 -0700 (PDT),
dkf2@columbia.edu (Duncan K. Foley) writes:
> In reply to Michael L.'s OPE-L:4852:
>
>
>> The question is *how* to reconcile them. Both (b) and (c) relate
>> directly to the determination of market wages (which are affected by the
>> characteristics of supply and demand, which includes class struggle).
>> How do we move, however, from this determination of market wages to the
>> standard of necessity? The argument I made before to Ajit (and in my
>> book) is that the level of necessary needs (which underlies the value
>> of labour-power) adjusts--- as the needs which people are able to
>> satisfy as the result of increases or decreases in market wages change.
>> Ie., the historical or social element entering into the reproduction
>> requirements of workers (a) --- assumed given in Capital---expands or
>> contracts. Do you see any other way to reconcile those 3 theories?
>>
>
> To tell you the truth this is an issue that I'm quite uncertain about, but
> want to think about and discuss more. The mechanism you propose makes a
> lot of sense, but it seems to presuppose a rise in market wages above the
> value of labor-power in the sense of an accepted workers' standard of
> living. I think Smith has something like this in mind in his discussion
> of wages. Does this lead in formal terms to viewing the value of
> labor-power as a kind of lagged average of past realized market wage
> rates?
Duncan,
This conception seems quite reasonable--- but not if we think of this as
an "extrinsic" average; rather, the process would be one in which the
mediation between market wage rates and the value of labour-power is the
change in the *quality* of the worker produced as the result of the changed
inputs into her production due to the increased/decreased market wages.
Eg., Marx talked about the "brutalization" of workers, the tendency to
"degrade" the worker to the level of the Irish as wages are driven down;
similarly, he noted that when wages rise, workers are able to widen their
sphere of pleasures and to participate in civilization. (I discuss this
question in Ch. 5 of my book.) In this respect, we would not expect the
value of labour-power to be affected by windfall gains but only with changes
in "permanent income".
> Isn't there also an upward pressure on wages in some periods from workers'
> political and union movements?
>
Yes, and downward as capital succeeds in weakening unions and increasing the
separation among workers.
in solidarity,
mike
-----------------------
Michael A. Lebowitz
Economics Department, Simon Fraser University
Burnaby, B.C. Canada V5A 1S6
Office (604) 291-4669; Office fax: (604) 291-5944
Home: (604) 872-0494; Home fax (with warning): (604) 872-0485
Lasqueti Island (250) 333-8810