DJP
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
You're speaking about women as though they were objects.People will do whatever they choose, as they do now.
Sympo wrote:Did you mean to write "the employer will NOT be extracting surplus value"?Nope.Employed workers in the non-productive sphere will still be being exploited by the employer in the same way as workers in the productive sphere. i.e surplus labour will be being extracted from them. It's just that all the "value" that is handled in the non-productive sphere is not newly made value, but value that has come from the productive sphere. So the surplus the capitalist takes is not newly created "surplus value", but value that has been pulled from other areas of the economy.We are only talking about capitalist relations here, and the distinction has no bearing on the social usefulness of the labour.Does putting it that way help?
Tim Kilgallon wrote:Surely many "self employed" workers are nothing but wage slaves in fancy dress. Many are working for employers who are exploiting their labour power in exactly the same way as waged workers, just with less employment protection.It's quite likely, in fact true, that many "self-employed" workers are not really self-employed, yes. But the productive / unproductive labour distinction is not entirely dependent on this.
Sympo wrote:I don't understand. How can an individual be economically exploited if he's not creating surplus value for his employer?Only productive labour produces new value. Productive labour is employed labour in the sphere of production that directly produces commodities.Unproductive labour includes the self-employed, managers, accountants, sales assistants and the service sector in general. The wages that workers receive in these sectors does not represent newly created value but is drawn from the productive part of the economy.So an employed sales assistant will not be producing any new value, but the activity will be drawing in value created elsewhere in the economy. The employer will be extracting surplus value from the worker, but the origin of this value will be in the productive sphere of the economy.These categories only apply to capitalism.Make sense?
Sympo wrote:DJP wrote:Sympo wrote:And just to complicate things, not all labour in capitalism produces "value". Some sectors just redistribute value that has already been created in other sectors of the economy. See the thing and productive and non-productive labour.Are people who engage in non-productive labour exploited by capitalists?
If they are employed by a capitalist then yes. The capitalist will still be syphoning off surplus value (or surplus labour – same thing), it's just that in terms of total value no new value has been created.Marx's analysis takes place on the level of groups, i.e the capitalist class and the proletariat, rather than the level of individuals. The working class *as a whole* is exploited, in that they do not receive the full product of their labour, but not all individual members of the working class will be exploited in this way i.e the unemployed etc.
Young Master Smeet wrote:Members are free to produce poor quality videos in their bedrooms if they like, but the only consideration being asked is that they do not pass them off as party products.I think that pretty much sums it up. In this case the EC has acted correctly as far as I'm concerned.
Wez wrote:I have a working knowledge of Photoshop and have windows 10 with an internet connection. I'm a qualified graphic designer so let me know if I can help.To be doubly sure this reaches who it should and quickly, I would email spgb.sspc@worldsocialism.org as well.
alanjjohnstone wrote:Quote:Dr Jimmy Smith is director general of the International Livestock Research InstituteThat may be the case, but that in and of itself does not mean that what he says on the matter is necessarily false.
hallblithe wrote:You can read why most Vegans eschew honey here.Thanks for that I read, but still don't think the arguments carry much weight. Is there any sound evidence that animal protein (how much is found in honey anyhow, surely just trace amounts) is harmful to health. And I'm still not convinced that bees can experience suffering.What is the standard Vegan response to an infestation of head lice of tape worm? How can one rid oneself without harming living creatures?
Veganism also rules out the consumption of insects and insect derived foods, such as honey. I'm not sure of the logic in that or the environmental harm involved either. Does anyone really think bees are sentient or suffer in the production of honey?
Tim Kilgallon wrote:I think it is very sad that we do not have a section on the forum specifically outlining what we are doing in terms of activities, offering the chance for others to get involved.I think you're missing this:http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/calendar
"They", that is people who teach about making successful Youtube videos, say that it is necessary to hook people in the first 10 to 17 seconds. With that in mind, it may be worth cutting the time of the logo animation at the start and going straight into the narration.
Can I make the following suggestion.Behaviour that would not be tolerated in a physical meeting should not be tolerated on the forum.If a participant at a public meeting continually abused other members of the meeting they would be asked to leave the room and probably barred from attending future meetings. The same should apply to the forum. I think there is a certain forum member who should be made to leave and barred from reattending, as they are repeating a familiar pattern of disruptiveness.Failure to deal with such behaviour makes the party look bad.We should not be publishing forum comments which are just personal insults. Such comments should be deleted.
