[PEN-L:11204] rent question -- an addendumb

[James Devine <jdevine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Yes, addenDUMB: I got so hung up with the idea of execs being paid a
scarcity rent that I lost sight of what they get paid when they don't
receive a scarcity rent, i.e., when they're paid their "Marginal physical
product."

Since corporate execs are, strictly speaking, unproductive workers -- i.e.,
not producing surplus-value directly -- the "marginal product" of an exec's
"labor" is problematic. To a neoclassical, it's no problem: hey, divide the
extra production that results from the exec's exertions by the amount of
those efforts and you've got the MPP. But to a Marxian economist, that's
obfuscating. The "MPP" of the exec would be the rise in the amount that
productive workers produce (extorted by the exec's minions under the
supervision of the exec) divided by the amount of the exec's efforts.

Most execs wouldn't have their salaries determined by that "MPP," by the
way, since much of what they do is pure financial paper-shuffling. Much of
that is quite profitable to the owners of the corporation, thank you very
much, even it doesn't add to the aggregate surplus-value at all.

mea culpa: I've broken two resolutions in one day.


in pen-l solidarity,

Jim Devine   jdevine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
jim_devine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Econ. Dept., Loyola Marymount Univ.
7900 Loyola Blvd., Los Angeles, CA 90045-8410 USA
310/338-2948 (daytime, during workweek); FAX: 310/338-1950
"Segui il tuo corso, e lascia dir le genti." (Go your own way
and let people talk.) -- K. Marx, paraphrasing Dante A.