[Marxism] Still too many farts about labor value

Stacey Barber emusis at adelphia.net
Tue May 4 17:48:30 MDT 2004


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Tue, 04 May 2004 15:54:42 -0400
From: "jake shearer" <kapshow at hotmail.com>
Subject: [Marxism] still too many farts about labor value
To: marxism at lists.econ.utah.edu
Message-ID: <Sea1-F23XOK7S8MyBuN000067a5 at hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed

thank the klass gods

this list lacks
the brigade
of loose jawed
" arbeit-vert" theorists

how refreshing
to see the national question
and quaint marxoidials
like " turnoverrates "
instead of
school boy
matrix algebra
renditions of  the transformation problem
" assume all labor is homogeneous"
  or is it homosexual ?

does any one have
one solid
otherwise impossible
practical result
from their spurious mastery
of this golden problem of marxism?

its one thing to plumb the depths
for the big ones
its another
to pull up blow fish
and call them whales

what say you komrades ?

This poet says it was a really crappy poem.  I think this one is better--

Stacey B.   

Negotiations (A.D. 2004) 


     The big men stood on the high hills and the little 
men stood on the low hills. The high hill people made 
use of the little hill people tp make their lands beautiful. 
Some high hill people didn't think their lands were 
beautiful when the big men made use of them so they 
were little people living on big hills. 
     The little people living on the little hills didn't 
necessarily like their little-big men, but thought 
they were better than the big men living on the big 
hills. The little-big men on the little hills liked to 
talk about how there were little people on the 
big hills, but because they lived on the big hills, 
they were more interested in the big men and had 
little trouble benefitting from the way the big men 
from the big hills used the little people from the 
little hills. 
     Sometimes the little-big people from the 
little hills liked to show how tough they were. 
One little-big man, in the face of the biggest big 
men from the big hills showing how big they 
were by going after one of the little-big men 
for posing a threat to the big hills, told the 
big men that it wasn't a threat, but a promise. 
The big men made some promising threats of 
their own. The little-big man relented and 
let big men inspectors into his little hill so 
the big men, especially the biggest big men, 
could see that he really was a little man from the 
little hills and didn't pose a threat. 
     Another little-big man, after being 
considered an especially dangerous little man, 
proposed to the big men that though he was 
a little man he could act big by letting the 
big men see he wasn't a threat either. The 
big men guffawed and said, " We just removed 
another little man using his little people for 
little means. You're not big. You just know how 
little you are. " This little-big man still insisted 
he was acting big, to which the big men replied. 
" We'll see. " 

     A somewhat big little-big man hated how 
the big men treated the little people from the 
little hills going to the big hills. " Ha! " said this 
somewhat big little-big man. " We'll do the same 
thing to you. " So the little people from the 
big hills would be treated like the little people 
were treated, excpet for their favorite parts 
of the little hills, which they never wondered 
too far from anyways. 
     So the big are still big and the little 
big are big in their little hills, while the little people 
in the big hills and the little people 
in the little hills get told how big or how little 
each are, while being little people for their 
big men. 







More information about the Marxism mailing list