You mean like this? An American student of working class life recalled similar differences between working conditions in Germany and the United States: ##When I was in Germany, Professor Roscher of Leipsic (sic), told me of German workmen who, after living in America, returned to Germany, preferring the long hours and low wages there rather than stand the strain at which they were required to work in America. When in Chicago, I found that some American workmen sympathized with this view. At the carpenters' union headquarters, when I spoke warmly of the union victory in securing the eight hours' day, I was surprised to have one of the carpenters remark, "yes; but if we won seven hours, half of us would be dead." [Spahr 1900, p. 177]
Yes, I have that. I know that my short description does not give an adequate picture of the breadth of what I am doing. Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University michael at ecst.csuchico.edu Chico, CA 95929 530-898-5321 fax 530-898-5901 -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, August 10, 2008 7:00 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Pen-l] The Irrelevance of Workers In Economic Theory Hi Michael, Another important aspect of this question is the "intensity of labor" - i.e. how hard workers work. This is an important variable in Marx's labor theory of value, because it is one determinant of the quantity of value produced. This enables Marx's theory to explain why there is a pervasive conflict over the intensity of labor in capitalist enterprises. In mainstream theory, quite to the contrary, the intensity of labor is not a variable at all. Therefore, mainstream theory is unable to explain why there is this pervasive conflict. Fred Quoting Michael Perelman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Many of you know that I am finishing up a book > manuscript regarding the exclusion of work, workers > and working conditions from economic theory. This > part jumps into the middle of a section. The meat of > the post is really in the third and fourth paragraphs, > where I do a JSTOR survey of the almost total > exclusion from economics. Fans of Martin Feldstein > may appreciate his contribution. > > > In short, the exclusion of work, workers, and working > conditions was not simply an accidental oversight. > First, it served an important purpose in defending the > capitalism from the accusation of exploitation. > Second, any analysis based on labor would call out for > both impossible quantification and more difficult > mathematics. Utility, however, seemed to permit > economists to avoid the need for quantification, while > seeming to simplify mathematical complexities. > Finally, utility seemed to be capable of fitting in > with the type of models that economists were using in > their quest to emulate physics with its mathematics of > maximization. > > As Phil Mirowski noted, "Production, as conventionally > understood, does not "fit" in neoclassical value > theory" (Mirowski 1989, p. 284). In short, ideology, > mathematical convenience, and scientific ambitions all > combined to sweep work, workers, and working > conditions under the rug. > The radical shift from labor to extreme subjectivity > in which consumer's unmeasurable preferences became > the center of economic analysis sealed labor's > marginalization in the theoretical world of economic > theory. Other fields, such as sociology, industrial > relations, or psychology seriously explore questions > of work, workers or working conditions, but economics > does not. > > An August 8, 2008 search of 73 economics journals > collected electronically in the JSTOR database > revealed how marginal work, workers, and working > conditions has become in economic literature. Of the > articles published since January 2004, the term > "working conditions" appeared in only 12, not counting > four more substantial articles in the Review of > African Political Economy, a journal rarely cited by > mainstream economists. Of the remaining articles, > three concerned the problem of retention of teachers. > Another had a footnote that observed that people can > learn about working conditions from websites. One > article noted that faculty members in colleges and > universities join unions to improve working > conditions. A book review considered whether > globalization could improve working conditions. Two > articles mentioned legislation that took working > conditions into account. One article disputed that > child labor abroad experienced hideous working > conditions. Another cited a mid-nineteenth century > British economist who said that factory working > conditions were good. > > My favorite entry was from Martin Feldstein, whose > contempt for spiteful egalitarian was discussed > earlier. This article was one of his many attacks on > Social Security that proposed that good working > conditions should be treated as taxable income > (Feldstein 2005, p. 36). None of the articles offered > any evidence of serious engagement with work, workers, > or working conditions. In contrast, a search for > sociologists' articles with the term "working > conditions" that covered ten fewer journals, returned > 107 articles. > > At the same time as questions of labor were > disappearing, economics began to elevate the status of > investors' financial claims, insisting that owners of > this form of property had rights equal to those of > owners of real goods, such as land or factories. Even > something as ephemeral as "good will" became > recognized as property. > > > -- Michael Perelman > Economics Department California State University > Chico, CA 95929 > > Tel. 530-898-5321 > E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu > michaelperelman.wordpress.com > _______________________________________________ > pen-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l > ---------------------------------------------------------------- This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program. _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
