1. You seem to agree that the costs of unproductive labor are
recovered out of surplus-value. This seems to me to be the key point
and what Marx said in the texts I have quoted.
2. However, you seem to argue further that the costs of unproductive
labor in the current period are recovered, not out of the surplus-value
produced in the current period, but out of the surplus-value of the
NEXT period. As I understand Marx (and business accounting
practices), the costs of the current period are recovered out of the price
of commodities in the current period. These costs must be continued
in the current period so that this unproductive labor can continue to be
employed in the next period without the outlay of additional capital.
What is the rationale and textual evidence for your interpretation?
Furthermore, you say that, in the current period these unproductive
costs should be included as a "separate entry" in the national accounts
"like depreciation and intermediate costs." I don't understand this
either. Here, you seem to be suggesting, as you have before, that these
unproductive costs should be counted as part of the constant capital
component of the price of commodities of the current period. But if
these costs are part of the constant capital component of the price of
commodities of the current period, then they will be recovered out of
this component of the price of the current period, and will not have to
be recovered out of the surplus-value in the next period.
Or, are you suggesting that these costs should be included in the
national accounts - and in the estimation of Marxian variables -
although they are not part of the current price of commodities? But
the Marxian variables for a given period, as I understand them, refer to
the component parts of the price of commodities produced during this
period.
So would you please clarify further? Thanks.
Comradely,
Fred