Re: Unproductive Labour and the Two Department Model

[glevy@xxxxxxxxx]

Somewhere along the way of reading your post I got lost, Phil.
Rather than deal with the entire post, let me take a smaller bite.
In the last section of your post, you wrote:

> Shop workers' labour considered productive
> A shop sells retailing services to the manufacturer.   What the
> customer pays is passed to the manufacturer, less the shop's charge for
> the retailing service.

Err... what kind of 'shop' are you talking about?  Let's say  the
retail shop is a liquor store.  In that case, the manufacturer (Jonny
Walker) sells the output produced to wholesalers who then re-sell
those commodities to the retail outlet -- the liquor store. The liquor
store doesn't sell retailing services to Jonny Walker -- rather,
it *buys* cases of whiskey from the manufacturer through (usually)
the intermediary of the wholesaler.  What the consumer then pays
isn't passed on to Jonny Walker but is received by the retail seller.
(NB: there is often a large mark-up in retail price by the seller
over what was paid for the commodity to the manufacturer or the
wholesaler).

> is means that retailing services are part of
> the manufacturer's costs.

In the example I give above, I don't think they are.

> The customer, in reality, buys from the manufacturer.

Not really.  The consumer buys from a seller which isn't
the manufacturer.

> Shops are in Department I.

Huh?  Now you've really lost me.  If the 'shops' sell means of
consumption, why are they in Department I?

In solidarity, Jerry