Sept. 22, 1999
Wage-Labour & Capital
Later Marx: focus on economic aspects
WLC written 1849; revised by Engels to conform to Marx’s later thought,
1891.
Difference between labor & labor power: p. 204
labor - the actual work
labor power - the ability to do work
Under capitalism, labor power is a commodity
*Remember defn. of commodity: thing that is bought and sold
Existence of things as commodities does not arise from their physical
properties; instead it arises from relationships among men -- i.e., exchange
Capitalist buys labor power as he buys raw materials, tools, etc.
Why does worker sell his labor power? P. 204
In order to live
Worker sells self to capitalist; has no choice; cf. Estranged Labor
Choice of capitalists, but not of whether to sell labor, p. 205
Social relations of production determine this
How many have jobs? Is your job your real life?
Marx says not; psychological alienation, but note stress here is on
economic
Cost of production
raw materials, tools, labor
What is the cost of production of labor power? p. 206
subsistence + training + family
Worker produces more than he earns: this is the source of surplus value
** Difference between the cost of production of worker (in labor time) and the amount of time the laborer can work produces missing value **
Social relations of production (how the economy is set up) are affected by the forces of production
Capital is a social product (a product of the social relations of production)
Can't have capital w/o wage labor, or wage labor w/o capital, p.
When worker works for capitalist, he gets only means to stay alive, but produces additional value for capitalist
Can the worker get more? What determines how much more? What is the limit?
minimum wage (across working class) is subsistence: this means that wages in general cannot fall below this minimum (WC will die out) -- p. 206
maximum is value added; actual relations determined by class struggle
Ways to increase surplus value
New methods of production, pp. 268-69 (380-81)
Individual value of product may be less than its social value, enabling capitalist to realize more surplus value per item
He sells them below their social value (to gain more market share) but above their individual value
But soon other capitalists adopt the improved methods and the advantage of the first capitalist vanishes, p. 212-213 [270](382)
General rate of surplus value is only affected when items necessary
for the production of labor power are affected by improved methods -- this
reduces the necessary labor time & thus increases the rate of surplus
value
Thus there is an inherent tendency for the capitalists to try to make
labor more productive in order to cheapen commodities and so to make labor
power cheaper (?) p. 271 (383)
* Are capitalists greedy? Could we have capitalism but with nicer
people in charge?
"Nice" capitalist will go out of business because unable to pay for
new machines
Marx’s view of history:
Falling rate of profit ==> periodic crises of capitalism ==> expansion
of markets abroad; imperialism
reaching of limits of expansion ==> war; eventual collapse of capitalism
Key points:
Absolute opposition of interests of working class/capitalists (zero
sum)
(even when size of pie increases, because of relative wellbeing) p.
39-40
No community of interests as long as there is capitalism
Class struggle as key to understanding society
Reforms made as concessions to prevent revolution
(hence paradox of the worse it gets the better it gets)
Economic determinism; severe limits on how much we can change society,
how much we can determine our own role
Meaning of exploitation & surplus value
Envy
Additional points:
Ideological superstructure
Role of state & laws
Questions raised in papers:
Is it better to be a worker or a capitalist? Can you choose?
Susie says yes, Ana yes but difficult, Mike says yes
Jasmine notes alienation of capitalist
Role of technology today: does it replace workers? Does
it make work less interesting?
Info technology tends to relieve some workers of tedious tasks, rather
than making remaining tasks more tedious
Is competition good? - Dana & Susie point out benefits
Power of capitalist: is it just economic? - Vicky
Does he make the case that workers are exploited? - Vicky
implies imbalance of power
Effect on sense of community - Cynthia
Solutions
What would he think of employee stock ownership plans? - Jamie
(not about "nicer capitalist")
Can capitalism offer full employment? - Cynthia
Susie - having one company that owns everything would solve problem
essentially what is tried in state capitalism e.g. soviet union.
Other questions:
Can machines produce value? Why can't the reasoning Marx uses to show difference between exchange value of labor and its use value also be applied to machines?
Can you imagine a manufacturing industry (almost) entirely run by machines?
What would determine the exchange value of the product?
It is like saying raw materials produce value
value of the machine is its cost of production as opposed to what it
can produce
that cost of production is added (fractionally) to each item it produces
there is no difference between the cost of production of the machine
and the value that it adds to manufactured goods (except insofar as the
capitalist is ahead of the market)
think: we will "pay the machine " its cost of production, but we will
obtain from the machine ...
If you pay the worker the entire value that he adds, you cannot succeed
as a capitalist -- what are you getting out of it?
It is easy to see in case of worker because what he buys is also the
product of labor
I add 5 hours of labor, you pay me the value of three hours (I can buy
what I could make in 3 hours)
the machine adds 5 hours of labor, you might pay FOR the machine what
you would pay a person for 3 hours of labor -- but only if you are ahead
of the market
** because, suppose that you have a vertical monopoly: worker makes machine, then another worker uses it to make bread. It is clear that the bread is produced (entirely) through labor + raw materials. Capitalist buys the raw materials at their value, sells bread at its value. (Its value is lower because less labor time is needed to produce it.) The profit comes from labor.
Ironically, the machine simply reduces the exchange value of the product by making labor more efficient.
there is no way to buy the machine for less than it is worth
(Its exchange value, i.e., cost of production)
machine + raw materials + labor = product
suppose each sells at its value (cost of production)
the cost of production of the machine is clearly part of the cost of
production of the product
so is the cost of production of the worker
?
Work that machine can do vs. Work that is needed to produce the machine
you can compare directly how many hours of labor it takes to "produce
" the worker with the hours of labor that the worker can perform
you cannot compare direclty how many hours of labor it takes to produce
the machine with the hours of labor that the machine can perform -- because
it is not "machine labor " that produces the machine
you can only compare the result of mechanized production with the result
of hand production
which is a moving standard
and you cannot compare the "value added " by the machine with its cost,
except in the market
---------------------
What would Marx say about theory that supply and demand determine value?
(or -- what determines value if not labor?)
- fluctuate around true value
- what determines the level of supply?
Does Marx agree with Locke about the moral foundations of private property?
How might Locke respond to Marx?
Freedom of contract
Meaning of freedom
What would Marx have said about current return of women to the work
force?
- note two incomes now necessary for most families
Value of labor-power was determined by the amount necessary to sustain
the worker and his whole family
Machinery enables women and children to work in the factory, thus enabling the capitalist to spread the cost of supporting the family over all its members
Consequences of truth/untruth of labor theory of value