Re: human capital again

[Michael Perelman <michael@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Paul, I don't think that "human capital" is a particularly useful
concept.  In the US, student are tracked according to class -- although
it is not official.  Even in the absence of tracking, poor students go
to poor schools.  So a GW Bush can go and get a Harvard MBA as evidence
of human capital.

Are humans capital or does the concept make capital human?

I understand how I can accept a reduced income to go to med. school &
get a higher income, much as a capitalist invests in capital, but there
are so many factors involved.

Also, much learning does not come from labor.  Students usually learn
more from their fellow students than from professors.

Rant finished.


On Mon, Mar 22, 2004 at 09:37:50PM -0800, paul phillips wrote:
> Michael,
>
> I have read of 'cultural capital' and 'political captital' which seems
> to be equivalent of that obscene capitalist construction called, I
> think, 'good will' which corporations can claim as wealth when they sell
> out. But that is not investment in any sense in that it does not involve
> investment  of (labour) resources in creating something of productive (
> and productive is the operative word) value.
>      Human capital is something quite different.  Humans invest in
> buying  knowledge, produced by labour, which increases their
> productivity at a later date.  In that sense, human capital is a form of
> 'dead labour' equivalent to  physical capital.  None of these others are
> 'real' investment in 'dead labour' and hence, are not capital in the
> sense we use the term.
>
> Paul Phillips
>

--
Michael Perelman
Economics Department
California State University
Chico, CA 95929

Tel. 530-898-5321
E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu