Re: Unproductive labor

jurriaan bendien (
Wed, 4 Feb 1998 13:39:23 +0100

I finds Fred's interpretation very persuasive. It is based essentially on
two theses:

1. The costs of unproductive labor are part of the surplus-value component
of the price of
commodities, defined as value added less variable capital.
2. The total surplus-value is divided into two parts: one part that pays
for unproductive costs and the remaining profit for capitalists.

The worry I still have with it is, that this aggregate of total new INCOME
of capital which Fred defines as surplus-value includes unproductive COSTS
to capital. The total surplus value is therefore "surplus" only in a
special sense. We could say perhaps, for accounting purposes, "gross
surplus-value is not equal to gross profits".

If necessary labour has nothing to do with the transfer of value from
constant capital to the new product, how does Fred account for the
"consumption of fixed capital" ?


Jurriaan Bendien.