Re: (OPE-L) Re: how simple is too simple?

From: Phil Dunn (pscumnud@DIRCON.CO.UK)
Date: Sat Jun 12 2004 - 15:16:22 EDT

>Hi Phil.
>>  Workers live on air, but clearly this assumption does
>>  not matter.
>If 'workers live on air' (or v = 0) then the distinction
>between paid labor time and unpaid labor time has
>no meaning and s = 0 (unless, following Steve K, you
>believe that c can create s). If v and s then = 0, then
>the rate of profit (s/c+v) has no meaning and 'profit'
>is identified with c.  But 'clearly' this assumption does not
>And -- on that note --  I'll sign-off of my computer.
>Tonight I will sleep afloat.  I expect to hear from you
>all again in early September. Be good to each other.
>In solidarity, Jerry

Hi Jerry

It does not matter because wages could be put in without affecting
the argument.

I do not agree with Steve Keen about c creating value.  As I recall,
he does cite Marx in support of his thesis.

You raise an interesting point, nevertheless. Suppose a worker was
paid nothing for work done.  That is to say, the labour market fails
to recognise with money the value creating power of which the worker
is the material bearer (v=0). The product market could, however,
recognise with money the activity of this power (s>0).

Speed Bonny Boat


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Jun 13 2004 - 00:00:01 EDT