| This question <28|42> overall <31|35> Tripper: <330-50|83>. |
| Question 51: The value of a commodity does not increase if it is made by a slow or inept laborer. Explain carefully why not. |
| [32] Tripper: economics 508 In order for me to thoroughly explain why the value of a commodity does not increase if it is made by a slow or inept laborer, we must first understand that in previous paragraphs in the text Marx has con- cluded the following; “therefore the question how much value the product has reduces immediately to the question how much labor has been congealed in it.” From this statement we can understand that the value of a com- modity can be measured by the amount of labor time to produce that com- modity. |
| Further on in the text Marx warns us of taking this statement at face value, concluding that when we look more closely to the ab- straction of labor we realize the difference between labor time vs. the socially necessary labor time. Marx defines this as the following, “The labor time socially necessary is that required to produce an article under the prevailing socially normal conditions of production and with the socially average degree of skill and intensity.” |
| The example of the power loom vs. the English hand-loom weavers concluded that the socially necessary labor time could be cut in half by using the power loom, thus producing twice the value of the commodity in the product of one hour of their labor. This helps us to understand that if more labor time is spent on making the product, it does not represent an increase of value on that commodity. Marx concludes: “we see that which determines the magnitude of the value of any article is only the amount of socially necessary labor, or the labor time socially necessary for its production.” |
| Marx also states, “The value of them (the necessities of life), when they are exchanged the one for another, is regulated by the quantity of labor necessarily required, and commonly taken in producing them.” Therefore, any further labor time is not calculated in the value of that commodity. |
| Hans: I apologize for having given you a too bad grade for this before. You did something which the others did not do, namely, try to follow Marx's argument, and you read the annotations carefully. You should have criticized the earlier submissions for not doing that. Had your submission been the first, the whole discussion might have been much more fruitful. |
| Here is what I wrote in my earlier grade report: |
| This is the sixth submission which has to do with Question 51. Had it been the first, it would have been ok as a first stab at it. But you do not seem to even look at the ongoing discussion about the very same Question which you want to answer. |
|
|
|||||