Re: [OPE-L] "parasitism" of the service sector?

From: Dave Zachariah (davez@KTH.SE)
Date: Mon Jan 21 2008 - 14:03:29 EST

on 2008-01-20 13:13 Jerry Levy wrote:
> Note, for instance, that the growth of some service sector jobs in India (e.g. call centers) is driven in large part by policies of major transnational corporations. It is not the wealth generated in industry and agriculture in India which causes the additional demand for jobs in call centers.

I think you are confusing "demand" from "material support" that I was
talking about. Yes, effective demand is necessary for the expansion of a
capitalist sector. But the additional demand for call centers cannot
lead to its growth unless the productive sectors can feed its workers
and produce its means of production. These means of consumption and
production are the embodiment of surplus labour performed in the
productive sectors.

My understanding of political economy is rooted in a material conception
of history, not the other way around.

> what policy proposals do you favor for dealing with the "problem" of  workers who [you believe] are "parasitic"?

It is not the workers but the economic activities that are parasitic.
Policies that shift their employment from unproductive to productive
sectors are beneficial to the development of the economy's capacity and
the living standard of the working people. This could be state-led
industrialisation, investments in roads and telecommunications,
expansion of public schools etc.

//Dave Z

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