IMPORTANT: If you cite this message, OPE-L policy requires you not to reveal the identity of the author.
You may cite this message only if you do not disclose who wrote it.
Hi Mike L. > Would people agree that the macworkers are not only exploited > but also the source of surplus value? Sure. If an opera singer employed by a capitalist firm can be productive of surplus value then why not MacDonald workers? The distinction between productive and unproductive labor should not be confused with whether the form that a commodity takes is a tangible material product or a service. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "An actor, for example, or even a CLOWN, according to this definition, is a productive labourer if he works in the service of a capitalist (an entrepreneur) to whom he returns more labour than he receives from him in the form of wages." (_Theories of Surplus Value_, Part I, Progress, p. 157, emphasis added). ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Does this mean that, according to Marx's understanding, a man or woman dressed up in a Ronald MacDonald suit is productive of surplus value? In solidarity, Jerry
- Re: (OPE-L) Re: Advisory Committee, (continued)
- Re: (OPE-L) Re: Advisory Committee, Rakesh Bhandari Mon 17 May 2004, 23:12 GMT
- Message not available
- Re: (OPE-L) Re: Advisory Committee, Ian Wright Mon 17 May 2004, 21:18 GMT
- Re: (OPE-L) Re: Advisory Committee, Rakesh Bhandari Tue 18 May 2004, 01:44 GMT
- the productive macworker, michael a. lebowitz Sun 16 May 2004, 20:10 GMT
- (OPE-L) Re: the productive macworker, Gerald A. Levy Sun 16 May 2004, 23:37 GMT
- Re: (OPE-L) Re: the productive macworker, michael a. lebowitz Mon 17 May 2004, 02:17 GMT
- (OPE-L) Re: the productive macworker, Gerald A. Levy Mon 17 May 2004, 12:25 GMT
- Re: (OPE-L) Re: the productive macworker, Michael Perelman Mon 17 May 2004, 21:14 GMT
- (OPE-L) Re: the productive macworker, Gerald A. Levy Tue 18 May 2004, 10:58 GMT