Re: [OPE] Reply to critics

From: Paula <>
Date: Fri Nov 12 2010 - 17:29:27 EST

Jerry wrote:
"I did that - repeatedly"

Yes, but the arguments you used were tautological IMHO. We have to do better than that. Of course if you think such reasoning is good enough, that's up to you.

"I haven't heard you say much of anything concretely about the insurance sector. You have primarily limited your role to asking questions."

Asking the right question is already a step towards finding the answer. And I actually have said a few things about labor performed in the insurance sector - a) it produces products, which have a use-value; b) it's exchanged with capital. The question then arises, in what sense is this labor unproductive, if at all, and why?

"Actually, I think it was mainstream economics which introduced the distinction between goods and services. Did Smith or Marx, for instance, talk about the production of 'goods' under capitalism?"

They insisted on this distinction at least in part because of its relevance for the issue of productive and unproductive labor. I should have said, therefore, that the tendency in mainstream economics *since the demise of classical political economy* has been to blur the distinction away and to consider goods and services merely in their common capacity as 'products'. I suspect this is a step back for economic theory.


ope mailing list
Received on Fri Nov 12 18:31:14 2010

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Nov 30 2010 - 00:00:04 EST