[OPE-L:5175] Re: Re: Re: Re: waste, value, and potential

["Gerald_A_Levy" <Gerald_A_Levy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Re Paul B's [OPE-L:5173]:

> Yes, case by case indeed, but it seems pretty
> evident that the same road can
> be used as part of the reproduction process
> generally and/or for private
> (revenue) final - non capitalistic -  use, as i said
> before. Neverthless,
> even this argument cannot evade the fact that
> surplus labour is extorted in
> the building of roads, railways etc  and I see this > labour process as
all
> productive.... otherwise we will be denying that
> all final consumption goods
> production not aimed at reproducing constant or > variable capital is
> unproductive ( eg luxury good production) and
> this is clearly  contrary to
> Marx.

Suppose that all of the labor used in the
building of the roads, railways etc. are employed
by the state. In that case would surplus labour
(time) be extorted by the state? Wouldn't that
require that state employees be productive of
surplus value and that part of the government
wage bill would represent variable capital? I don't
think that position fits in well with Marx's
perspectives. Indeed, I don't recall Marx remarking
on even a single instance in which state workers
should be viewed as productive of surplus value.
Can you?

As for your last sentence, we have to examine
also whether there is productive or unproductive
*consumption* of capital. If all of the surplus value
was unproductively consumed, then the
accumulation of capital would not be possible.
Thus, the productive re-investment of surplus
value in c and v is a precondition for the
continued accumulation of capital.

In solidarity, Jerry