Jim Devine wrote:
>
> >2) is labor power produced?
> >
> >that's a tougher one. it is reproduced for sure. but maybe even produced.
>
> it's produced (via sex, family nurturance, etc.), but the question is
> whether it's produced as a commodity.
I think it's a bit more complicated. Sex at mos
>>> "Mathew Forstater" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 03/09/00 11:34PM >>>
1) is labor power a commodity?
I think so. Bought and sold in a market.
**
CB: Yes, but by Marx's definition a commodity must have use-value, meet a want of
the stomach or of fancy, as well as exchange-value, be prod
I wrote that: >>maybe he's [George's] suggesting that industrial capital as
a social relationship isn't a commodity. It involves a non-market
(non-commodity) relationship of domination of workers within production.
(Of course, that authoritarianism is within the framework of a
commodity-produc
Mat F. writes:
>My ref to Coase was that that seemed to me to be what you were describing
>in your original post, that within the firm relations aren't determined by
>market bargaining but by command. But your response indicates that you
>seem to have understood what I was getting at?
yup.
>
>>> Jim Devine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 03/09/00 07:49PM >>>
maybe he's suggesting that industrial capital as a social relationship
isn't a commodity. It involves a non-market (non-commodity) relationship of
domination of workers within production. (Of course, that authoritarianism
is within the
>The verb in the sentence is "presents", not "is". The commodity fetish
>mistakes relations between people as relations between things. "Presents
>itself" plays right into Marx's contention that all is not "what it
>appears to be" in capitalist society. The "immense accumulation of
>commodities" i
I have always liked Polanyi's designation of labour (land and
money) as "fictitious commodities" because they are treated as if
they were commodities (bought and sold on the market) but which
are not produced for the purpose of selling on the market.
Mathew Forstater wrote:
> 1) is labor po
My ref to Coase was that that seemed to me to be what you were describing in
your original post, that within the firm relations aren't determined by
market bargaining but by command. But your response indicates that you seem
to have understood what I was getting at? As far as agriculture, you sa
I wrote: >> maybe he's suggesting that industrial capital as a social
relationship isn't a commodity. It involves a non-market (non-commodity)
relationship of domination of workers within production. (Of course, that
authoritarianism is within the framework of a commodity-producing society
t
On Thu, 9 Mar 2000, Jim Devine wrote:
> At 07:37 PM 3/9/00 -0500, you wrote:
> >You have missed nothing, Mat. A commodity is something that is for sale.
> >Industrial capital is for sale everyday. The recent round of mergers and
> >takeovers demonstrate that without doubt.
> >
> >George is in fa
think that these courses have either been changed or are
no longer required.
-Original Message-
From: Jim Devine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thursday, March 09, 2000 6:58 PM
Subject: [PEN-L:17027] Re: Re: Re: Capital is wrong
>At 07:37 PM 3/9/00 -
At 07:37 PM 3/9/00 -0500, you wrote:
>You have missed nothing, Mat. A commodity is something that is for sale.
>Industrial capital is for sale everyday. The recent round of mergers and
>takeovers demonstrate that without doubt.
>
>George is in fact claiming that we do not live in a capitalist soci
You have missed nothing, Mat. A commodity is something that is for sale.
Industrial capital is for sale everyday. The recent round of mergers and
takeovers demonstrate that without doubt.
George is in fact claiming that we do not live in a capitalist society.
The first sentence of Capital, is on
13 matches
Mail list logo
