[OPE-L] management and leadership under capitalism and socialism

From: Jurriaan Bendien (adsl675281@TISCALI.NL)
Date: Sat Nov 04 2006 - 11:16:31 EST


I have some other work I must do just now, but will get back to you later
about your remarks.

But just think. If the wages of superintendence in production do not enter
into the determination of the average rate of profit, and if unproductive
labor should be counted as a deduction from profit, why then do Moseley and
Shaikh include it in the total surplus-value component of the gross output?

In balance sheets, managerial/supervisory labour compensation figures as a
cost. If it isn't a cost, it must be an appropriation of revenue, i.e. an
appropriation of surplus value. Or there is some argument that a secondary
circuit of capital operates. If supervisory/managerial labour is partly
productive, partly not, then part of it is variable capital and partly an
appropriation of new surplus value.

We do not really get anywhere with this I think by abstract logic, I think
we would actually have to look at many specific categories of labour and how
they are compensated.


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Nov 30 2006 - 00:00:06 EST