From: Paul Cockshott (clyder@GN.APC.ORG)
Date: Fri Apr 30 2004 - 18:20:04 EDT
On Friday 30 Apr 2004 05:20, michael a. lebowitz wrote: > At 17:40 29/04/2004, Paul C wrote: > >The wages of workers in Europe and the US are above the > >value of labour power if this is taken to be the reproduction > >cost of labour. This is born out by the fact that labour can > >be reproduced much more cheaply in India or China. > > Doesn't the set of necessaries underlying the value of > labour-power have something to do with historically developed social needs, > which become second nature? I suspect that given time and mobility of capital, some historically developed social necessities might be found by the ruling class to be not so necessary after all. I accept your argument that the actual wage is determined by conditions of class struggle, but this allows it to be raised above what is strictly necessary for reproduction. > > >It is only a commitment to the working class interest that > >inhibits Marxists from admiting this. > > You mean we are dishonest? We want to defend the actual real wage from being reduced so we say that it is no more than the value of labour power. I suspect that it is well above the value of labour power, but of course workers are still exploited.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun May 02 2004 - 00:00:02 EDT