RE: [OPE] review of Dumenil & Levy's Capital Resurgent

Date: Sun Jun 01 2008 - 09:25:18 EDT

>  It seems to me that there are two useful notions of productivity:> Either the output per unit of direct labour, i.e. labour productivity at > the 'plant level'.> Or output per unit of social labour, i.e. inverse unit labour-values.> But they are quite similar and involve physical quantities.
Hi Dave Z:
Well, there have been (at least) two different definitions of productivity used
by Marxians: one (output/worker/period of time) uses the conventional 
measure and focuses on the production of physical quantities (use-values)
per unit of labor time. The other definition asserts that for the productivity of 
labor to change  the ratio of  necessary to surplus labor time must change.
These two definitions are quite distinct and lead to differing interpretations:
e.g. can the productivity of labor increase because of increasing intensity
of labor absent technological change?  On a related note, there are 
different understandings of absolute and relative surplus value: is an 
increase in  labor intensity an increase in absolute or relative s?
Riccardo (in 1996) noted that there are two different expressions - with 
different meanings - in German by Marx which have been translated 
into English as 'productivity of labor' but I couldn't readily find that 
post (from PEN-L).   Perhaps that's the source of the confusion.
In solidarity, Jerry

ope mailing list

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Jun 30 2008 - 00:00:16 EDT