on "productivity of labor" Of course it is important to distinguish between the effects of technical change, and the effects of increased labor intensity. Of course both of these things may occur together. Both of them generally increase profits for capitalists. But they have rather different effects upon the lives of workers. It's a matter of analysis to distinguish between them. One must [conceptually] hold intensity of labor constant, at an average, abstract, social level [as Marx might say] in order to compare productivity between different technologies, different sectors of production, etc. When thinking in this way, the appropriate definition of productivity seems to me to be output/workerhour. If one also holds the length of the working day constant, productivity is output/worker. That is, an abstract average worker, not any particular real concrete worker, [unless one wishes to compare individual workers with each other.] If one wishes to examine the effects of increasing intensity alone, then changes in technology and organization of work must be held constant. I think this is the concept that a 'non-economist' or indeed anyone would like to clearly understand. I suspect that those who seem to be arguing about definitions are actually in agreement on the concept I have outlined above. If I seem to be in _conceptual_ error, I hope to receive an explanation that will improve my understanding of this point. Lisa Rogers biologist, anthropology grad-stu, semi-economist
