Date: Tue, 1 Aug 1995 09:06:16 -0400 (EDT)
From: glevy-AT-acnet.pratt.edu
Subject: Productive and Unproductive Labor


Paul wrote:

> To get into the debate over productive versus unproductive labor, labor 
> employed in the finance sector is unproductive labor and so does NOT 
> produce surplus value (it consumes surplus value produced elsewhere).
> 
Glad to see you participate, Paul.  I've read and enjoyed many of your 
writings.

Is labor employed in the finance sector productive or unproductive in 
Marx's understanding?  An interesting question.  My understanding is that 
wage labor employed by private capital to produce surplus value is 
productive labor.  Yes?

There is clearly commodity production in the  financial service sector   
although it takes the form of a service rather  than a material good 
(like a car).  Many people (I'm sure you are not one) confuse commodity 
production with the production of material goods. Financial service 
employers are private employers and not part of the state sector.

So, in what sense can we say that *some* wage earners within the 
financial service sector are not productive (of surplus value) laborers?
Of course, there are many who are employed in that sector who are 
unproductive laborers (managers, accountants, advertisement staff, 
etc.), but are you saying that the financial service sector itself (I 
think you are) does not produce surplus value?

I will admit that the whole subject of productive vs. unproductive labor 
can get rather complex when we discuss individual situations.  For 
instance, there are educators who might be seen as being partially 
productive and partially unproductive (to give just one example).  The issue 
gets even more complex when we discuss the reproduction of the 
commodity, labor power.

What thoughts do you (or anyone else) have on this thread?

Jerry


     --- from list marxism-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---

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