Re: [OPE-L] accumulation of capital and the working class - actual non existence of variable capital

From: Ian Hunt (ian.hunt@FLINDERS.EDU.AU)
Date: Fri Jan 11 2008 - 21:51:25 EST

Dear Jerry,
I don't think unproductive labour is a cost of production: if it were
it should be regarded simply as that, like ancillary labour of
machine servicing etc. It should be noted that all of the different
proposals have different effects on the rate of profit: that may be
one way of deciding which method is best,

>  > I would express it as as r = (s-u)/K
>>   where u is unproductive wages
>Hi Paul C:
>That would be consistent with the idea that u represents a
>deduction from s.
>Another alternative would be to write:
>r = s/(c+u)+v
>This would retain v in the formula, which - as you have
>explained - you object to. OTOH, it would put u in the
>denominator and thereby make it clear that u is a cost of
>production, but one unlike v (because it doesn't produce
>value) and also unlike c (because it represents expenditures
>for labor rather than means of production).
>There is a temporal dimension to the perspective that u
>represents a deduction from s that doesn't quite fit.
>I.e. wages for v and u are actually (and logically?) paid
>out at the same time rather than v being paid out first
>followed by a temporal lag when s is realized and then
>u is paid out.  This lag becomes obvious if we put the
>issue in terms of period analysis (which, as we both agree,
>has inherent limitations).
>In solidarity, Jerry

Associate Professor Ian Hunt,
Dept  of Philosophy, School of Humanities,
Director, Centre for Applied Philosophy,
Flinders University of SA,
Humanities Building,
Bedford Park, SA, 5042,
Ph: (08) 8201 2054 Fax: (08) 8201 2784

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Jan 31 2008 - 00:00:06 EST