Re: human capital again

["Devine, James" <jdevine@xxxxxxx>]

recently, the NY TIMES had an article about how much "organizational capital" (the "social capital" inside the organization a.k.a. "corporate culture") could be recorded in PCs and thus used and remembered more easily. This, they said, was how the PC helped productivity.
Jim D.

	-----Original Message----- 
	From: paul phillips [mailto:phillipsp@xxxxxxx] 
	Sent: Mon 3/22/2004 9:37 PM 
	To: PEN-L@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
	Cc: 
	Subject: Re: [PEN-L] human capital again
	
	

	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 wrote:
	
	>112-3: They refer to "a plethora of capitals" -- human capital,
	>   cultural capital, and even self-command capital..
	>Baron, James N. and Michael T. Hannan. 1994. "The Impact of
	>   Economics on Contemporary Sociology." Journal of Economic
	>   Literature, 32: 3 (September): pp. 111-46.
	>
	>--
	>Michael Perelman
	>Economics Department
	>California State University
	>Chico, CA 95929
	>
	>Tel. 530-898-5321
	>E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu
	>
	>
	>