if terrorists attack, it would be similar in effect to the hypothetical S&G spat on
the second night. The liability questions would be settled by the courts, mostly to
help the rich.
I don't know what "should" happen here.
jd
-----Original Message-----
From: PEN-L list on behalf of sartesian
Sent: Sun 7/4/2004 2:17 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc:
Subject: Re: [PEN-L] Simon and Garfunkel
Yeah, but what if a terrorist hijacks Simon and Garfunkel's private jet and
crashes into the stage after it was set up, killing the nauseating pair, and
forcing a refund.. And suppose the concert insurance doesn't cover terrorist
acts of god, then what... should the government step and subsidize the
concert givers? compensate the victims families? Should it?
Or should it let the market handle the matters-- according to the well known
American traditions of fair play and non-cosmic justice-- the type practiced
at Gitmo, and in Baghdad, or Sing-Sing?
And what about the burn victims? Who should pay for that?
Hey these are really important questions, and the fact that Marxists don't
take them seriously shows how ill-suited Marxism really is to modern living.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Devine, James" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, July 04, 2004 11:09 AM
Subject: Re: [PEN-L] Simon and Garfunkel
> Barrister Shemano writes:
> >... Let's imagine the crew does all their work. They set up the special
sound and light systems, etc. However, Simon and Garfunkel get into a fight
and refuse to perform, so the show is cancelled and all ticket are refunded.
The next night, Simon and Garfunkel reunite. The crew, pissed off, refuses
to do any work. So Simon and Garfunkel go on stage, Simon plugs his guitar
into the existent sound system, and notwithstanding the lack of special
lighting, a backup band, etc., the two of them perform for 18,000 people who
pay $2.7 million.
>
> >I am not sure what my questions are. In what sense is the crew producing
surplus value? What value did they produce on night one? What exactly is
the value that is being created? Isn't all the value, for all practical
purposes, being created by Simon and Garfunkel? Isn't the crews' value
purely contextual and unrelated to their labor per se?<
>
> This production process took two days. The crew produced the SV on the
first day, but it was only _realized_ on the second. S&G produced some of it
on the second day, but they also claimed more than they produced. The fact
that they were able to claim more than they produced (their monopoly power)
is indicated that they were able to cancel the first day simply because of a
spat -- and then allow the realization of the surplus-value on the second
day. (This assumes that there are lots of people who would be willing to pay
to hear their music.)
>
> It's possible that the produced SV could have gone to waste, i.e., if
S&G's spat had continued. In that case, the SV would not have been realized.
>
> jd
>
>
>
>
