Cutting hours with no cut in pay does reduce surplus value. And, to repond to Carroll, cutting hours is a vector, not a destination, and potentially a campaign that speaks to the majority population. I don't think "reduce the amount of surplus value" is a rival for the bumper sticker.
Gene On Apr 25, 2014, at 11:11 PM, [email protected] wrote: > "Eugene Coyle" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > What's the best way to put that political question on the table? I think > > it is a fight over shorter hours. > > I think that it's a fight over who controls the means of production. But > getting there requires > some intermediate steps such as reducing the amount of surplus value that > goes to capital, > rent seekers, religions, and political appointees. > > -- > Ron > > _______________________________________________ > 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
