Re: [Pen-l] Re: The Irrelevance of Workers In Economic Theory

["michael a. lebowitz" <mlebowit@xxxxxx>]

Note how entranced Marx was with Ricardo at that time as evidenced in this text. This is a Ricardian concept--- a far cry from the Marx who said the most important new thing in Capital was the distinction between abstract and concrete labour.
       moichael

On 12/08/2008 1:46 PM, Michael Nuwer wrote:

"the pendulum of the clock has become as accurate a measure of the relative activity of two workers as it is of the speed of two locomotives. Therefore, we should not say that one man's hour is worth another man's hour, but rather that one man during an hour is worth just as much as another man during an hour. Time is everything, man is nothing." [The Poverty of Philosophy]

http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/poverty-philosophy/ch01b.htm


Michael Perelman wrote:

How can you measure abtract labor?  How many teachers is a doctor worth?  Are all teachers and doctors to count for the same amount?

On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 12:27:12PM -0400, Charles Brown wrote:

CB: Can't abstract labor be measured in time ? Concrete labor might be
hard to quantify except in terms of numbers of commodity units ?

_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
pen-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

-- 
Michael A. Lebowitz
Professor Emeritus
Economics Department
Simon Fraser University
Burnaby, B.C., Canada V5A 1S6

Director, Programme in 'Transformative Practice and Human Development'
Centro Internacional Miranda, P.H.
Residencias Anauco Suites, Parque Central, final Av. Bolivar
Caracas, Venezuela
fax: 0212 5768274/0212 5777231
http//:centrointernacionalmiranda.gob.ve
mlebowit@xxxxxx

_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
pen-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l