Re: [OPE-L] Proposition #5

From: Jerry Levy (Gerald_A_Levy@MSN.COM)
Date: Wed Mar 14 2007 - 11:55:20 EDT

Hi Ajit:

We seem to be held up on some points.  I have asked
myself why and I think I now know the answer -- for
which I thank you.  In this dialogue I sought to first
define basic terms and make some simple stipulations in the hope
that we could put "on the table" what we could  agree on before
moving to other topics.  Thus, I have purposely avoided
mentioning  and  explaining  VALUE  yet.  I was planning on getting
to that  topic, of  course, but not  right away.   I thought, instead,
that we could approach in stages that subject by first discussing
related topics (commodities, money, wage-labor, etc.) so that
value could be grasped in relation to those topics.

> That's one thing but to deduce from it that all the
> wealth owned by the capitalist is produced by
> wage-labor is wrong. Land is wealth and could be owned
> by the capitalist but in no case is produced by
> wage-labor.

I agree with that: not all wealth is produced by human labor
nor by wage-labor.  Indeed, that's a point I have made many
times on this list.  The reason  wanted to deal  initially with only
wealth produced by wage-labor is because I didn't want at this
stage of my discussion with you to distinguish wealth from
VALUE.  I was quite aware of the (over-) simplification that I
was making but made that (over-)  simplification anyway for the
purpose _only_ of discussion.  I now see that was a mistake.

I'll give your other comments some thought.  But, more
importantly, I'll have to re-think the sequence in which the
propositions have been made and WHEN the subjects that
will be more controversial related to labor and value are
first presented.  So, I'm not cutting-off the exchange but rather
putting it temporarily on hold.  I did say that we would proceed
*slowly*, as you will recall.

In solidarity, Jerry

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Mar 31 2007 - 01:00:12 EDT