charlesb at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us
Mon Jul 14 09:52:33 MDT 2008
Yes, of course, labor-time is tracked for bookkeeping and planning
purposes; "socially necessary labor time," however is the determination
in the market for the realization of exchange values.
CB: And Marx refers to "value".
But "socially necessary" is determined directly, under or by socialism,
the producers-- by the workers, through their organs or direct economic
political power-- i.e. workers councils, planning commisssions, etc.
CB: However it is determined , it is used to calculate how much people
are paid _in socialism_. You are busted in this debate, by Marx
"Socially necessary labor time," with socialism, is not used for
determining wages; it is not the mechanism for apportioning surplus, no
than profit-- the "socially necessary" manifestation of value under
capitalism-- IS surplus under socialism.
CB: It's used to determine socialist "wages", as implied by Marx's
statement referring to _value_.
Reread the beginning of _Capital_ to get why when Marx refers to
"value" it imputes the whole bundle of concepts, including socially
necessary labor time, wage etc.
The fundamental flaw in the arguments about volumes of use-values, and
socially necessary labor time, besides the fact that it confuses use
exchange, quantity and need, is that the means of production at,
all through the assumption of power by the proletariat cannot and will
ever be "constant," "equal," "equivalent," etc.
CB: There is no fundamental flaw in the argument I put forth here. It
is correct. There is no confusion of use and exchange value. In Marx's
discussion of these fundamentals, the production of use-value is a
premise for the production of exchange-value. Carrying this discussion
over to the socialist context, use-values must , of course, be produced
in socialism too. Average socially necessary labor time is just the
standard of normal labor in society for producing a given use-value. It
would be established concretely in the given socialist society.
Consequently any attempt
to use "productivity" as a basis for wage-differentials only reproduces
separation between workers and means of production which is the
characteristic of capitalism.
CB: Your reasoning here is abstractly unrealistic. In an industrial
socialist society, obviously, the means of production are owned
collectively and by the state as representative of the working class.
What can be, and always is, equivalent is the labor time expended by
CB: It is workers who raise the issue of shirkers. We had a letter here
from a Cuban worker on the issue of shirkers about a month or so ago.
This message has been scanned for malware by SurfControl plc. www.surfcontrol.com
More information about the Marxism