On 7/8/06, Walt Byars wrote:
OK. Your reasoning is that in Marx, the value of a good is the labor
socially necessary to reproduce it. So, the amount of labor socially necessary to reproduce a given act of concrete labor is the laborer's labor power. Am I right? ... <
I can't speak for Gil, but "a given act of concrete labor" isn't on the market -- it's not a commodity -- and thus doesn't have a value at all in the Marxian system. It's the labor-power which has a value. (To my mind, the idea of setting the value of labor-power equal to the labor necessary to reproduce it is problematic. It was a reasonable simplifying assumption in most of CAPITAL volume I, however.) -- Jim Devine / "It was the mystical dogma of Bentham and Adam Smith and the rest, that some of the worst of human passions would turn out to be all for the best. It was the mysterious doctrine that selfishness would do the work of unselfishness." -- G. K.Chesterton. This email was cleaned by emailStripper, available for free from http://www.papercut.biz/emailStripper.htm
