Re: [OPE-L] basics vs. non-basics and financial services

From: Diego Guerrero (diego.guerrero@CPS.UCM.ES)
Date: Fri Oct 07 2005 - 04:42:24 EDT

Paul wrote:
Smiths concept of productive labour was tied to accumulation. For
him labour is productive if it contributes to accumulation. He gives
two definitions of this:
1. That the labour must be employed out of capital not revenue
2. That it must fix itself in a vendible commodity

I think he was right to give both definitions. The first definition
presents the matter from the standpoint of the individual capitalist,
that he will get poor by employing servants out of revenue but rich
from employing workers out of capital. The second definition applies
from the standpoint of the economy as a whole. The economy as a whole
can only accumulate physical commodities - it can not accumulate
or haircuts.

Are you telling again that producing haircuts is unproductive of surplus
value? Is production of bread productive? I don't think that bread can be
accumulated. Is not money what can be accumulated, and money can come from
anywhere? Which do you prefer: Smith's view or Marx's?

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Oct 08 2005 - 00:00:01 EDT