Re: [OPE] Reply to critics

From: Dave Zachariah <>
Date: Wed Oct 06 2010 - 16:42:12 EDT

  On 2010-10-06 00:45, Paula wrote:
> No problem here, heart surgery is a service. A service is always an
> activity, not a thing. It's easy to distinguishing the two.

Firstly, a 'thing' is probably one of the most ambiguous theoretical
concepts one can think of.

Secondly, as Paul pointed out, hair cuts and heart surgeries result in
physical products; modified hair and hearts. When sold as commodities
you don't simply purchase the activity (motions etc.) that constitutes
the 'service' but its physical product, that is the use-value. Indeed,
if the physical product did not meet up to specification you would
demand money back.

The physical products --- modified hair or heart --- do however require
a certain amount of coexisting social labour. And this is the basis of
their labour-values.

Ian wrote:
> But the material distinction between things that can be stored and
> persist over time, that are alienable, and those that cannot, is of
> course important when we are thinking about stores of value, stocks of
> inventories etc. E.g., obviously haircuts could never serve as base money.
I agree with this.

//Dave Z
ope mailing list
Received on Wed Oct 6 16:50:29 2010

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sun Oct 31 2010 - 00:00:02 EDT