Re: (OPE-L) Re: indirect labor, the real wage, and the production of surplus value

From: michael a. lebowitz (mlebowit@SFU.CA)
Date: Fri Nov 21 2003 - 10:35:11 EST

At 08:57 21/11/2003 -0500, jerry wrote:
>Mike L asked:
> >   So, do you conclude that, all other things equal, the effect of
> > productivity increases in this case will be real wages rising at the rate
> > of productivity and, accordingly, a constant rate of surplus value?
>No, not really.   Unless there is a meaningful mechanism that would
>adjust real wages to a change in productivity such that real wages
>will grow by an amount equal to the rate of growth of labor
>productivity (or when there is declining productivity, cause a
>reduction of real wages by a rate equal to the rate of reduction in
>labor productivity)  there is no reason to come to this conclusion.

But, Jerry, yesterday you wrote the following:

>Assuming that commodities are sold at their value and assuming
>competitive  conditions,  productivity increases should result in declining
>commodity prices, including declining prices for means of consumption
>for workers. A given real wage, under these circumstances,  requires
>*declining money wages*.

Under these conditions (ie., falling commodity prices), won't real wages
grow with productivity--- unless something has produced a fall in money wages?
         in solidarity,

Michael A. Lebowitz
Professor Emeritus
Economics Department
Simon Fraser University
Burnaby, B.C., Canada V5A 1S6
Office Fax:   (604) 291-5944
Home:   Phone (604) 689-9510

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 22 2003 - 00:00:01 EST