dante at aztec.inre.asu.edu
Wed Oct 5 10:33:50 MDT 1994
Paul Cockshott wrote:
>By exchanging against revenue rather than
>against capital I mean basically that an employee in a non profit making
>organisation is not being used to expand the sum of value under the
>control of the organisation. A worker whose labour power exchanges against
>capital replaces her wages with a surplus, one whose labour power exchanges
>against revenue depends ultimately upon value produced elsewhere and
>transfered through the form of private or public revenues.
>A commercial language school is a self expanding capital, a public university
>generally is not. There may of course be intermediate institutions, but
>the dividing point is whether they just break even or make a profit.
m not sure I understand that profit/non-profit dichotomy: are you saying that
workers who engage in productive labor for non-profit companies are not
actually workers? Or at least not (in Marxist terms) exploited? Certain
members of AFSCME might have a different opinion. Is a janitor for,
say, a private hospital a worker while his cousin, a janitor for a public
hospital, isnt? Also, you seem to be forgetting that many Universities
are not public: is a professor at Princeton a worker since he works for
the private sector while his neighbor, who teaches at Rutgers, isnt?
Or am I just missing your point (in which case, please explain)?
Plus, I think that you are also missing the fact that to some extent even
public institutions are arms of private capitalists, and serve as a means
of increasing profits.
dante at aztec.asu.edu
More information about the Marxism