[1995ut:330-31]

This question <330-16|330-32> overall <330-28|330-32> Pikk: <330-27|108>.

Term Paper 902: Essay about Chapter Six

[330-31] Pikk: Chapter Six The Sale and Purchase of Labor-power

Labor-power produces use-values of any kind. Consequently, the commodities have to change hands in such a way that they create use-values for their owners. In order for the commodity to change hands, it needs a market with supply and demand. The market for labor-power builds on the assumption that labor-power cannot appear on the market as a commodity unless the possessor offers it for sale. This means that the laborer must dispose free labor-capacity, hence his person.

If this is fulfilled, the purchaser and the seller of labor-power meet in the market to exchange services. Labor-power must be bought and sold for limited time only, because this is what differentiates work from slavery. The owner of money must find the free worker available on the market, free in a double sense that as a free individual he can dispose his labor-power as his/hers own commodity and that he/she has no other commodity for sale. This is essential for the transformation of money into capital. The laborer possesses a factor of production such as any other essential mean of production.

The value of labor-power is determined as any other commodity, by the labor-time necessary for the production. Labor-power exists only as a capacity of the living individual . In other words, the value of labor-power is the value of the means of subsistence necessary for the maintenance of its owner. However, labor-power becomes a reality only by being expressed, it is activated only through labor. Education costs vary according to the degree of complexity. These expenses form a part of the total value spent in producing it.

The value of labor-power can also be resolved into the value of a definite quantity of the means of subsistence which are consumed at various terms. Some are consumed every day, others more randomly. But in whatever way the sum total of these outlays may be spread over the year, they must be covered by the average income. Hypothetically speaking, if this averages out to consume six hours of social labor every day then half a day of labor is required for the daily production of labor-power. But as a true capitalist, you are interested in maximizing profit by minimizing labor-value.

The minimum labor-value is formed by the value of the commodities which have to be supplied every day to the bearer of labor power, can renew his/hers life-process. If the price for labor-power falls to this minimum, it falls below its value since under such circumstances it can be maintained and developed only in a crippled state. This might seem brutal to most of us, but it is something a person on minimum wage must face every day. The theory about the exploited laborer who is brain washed by social powers within the society he/she is living, is basically what this is all about. The laborer is not an owner of his or hers own labor-power, it belongs to the commodity producer. Labor-power is value, like that of every other commodity, which is already determined before it enters the circulation. But its use-value consists in the subsequent exercise of that power.

Hans: Your first two sentences are:

Labor-power produces use-values of any kind. Consequently, the commodities have to change hands in such a way that they create use-values for their owners.

I do not understand the “consequently”.

Some of your formulations Marx would consider apologies for the capitalist system. For instance, you write

If this is fulfilled, the purchaser and the seller of labor-power meet in the market to exchange services.

Which is the “service” the owner of the means of production gives the laborer? Marx would say that private ownership of means of production prevents workers from access to the means of production which they need to survive and which should be rightfully theirs. Allowing workers to work as long as wages are low enough to leave room for profit is not something Marx would call a “service” to the laborer.

Labor-power must be bought and sold for limited time only, because this is what differentiates work from slavery.

This is what differentiates wage labor from slavery. By using the generic term “work” for wage labor, you act as if there was no other possibility to organize social production than wage labor. Two sentences down you write:

The laborer possesses a factor of production such as any other essential mean of production.

Again, Marx would take exception to this comparison between worker and capitalist. You describe the worker, just like the capitalist, as an owner of a factor of production, and therefore, by implication, you give the worker equal rights to the product as the capitalist. In Marx's eyes, the worker is the one who does the work, while the capitalist's legal “ownership” of the means of production is the social sanction of what amounts to an extortion.

What you write afterwards is an unhepful, because not entirely understood, paraphrase of Marx. You are going almost sentence by sentence through R 274:2:

Marx wrote this as preparation to the argument that a hard worker needs more means of consumption than someone who has easy work. Why did you copy the preparatory steps but leave the main point out? Because you did not understand what Marx was getting at.

I am skipping a few sentences. What you write here is a good and important observation which is often overlooked:

At the end you are trying to bring some criticism of capitalism. You write:

The laborer is not an owner of his or hers own labor-power, it belongs to the commodity producer.

Again, Marx would turn over in his grave would he hear you call the capitalist the “producer.” It is not the right criticism of capitalism to say that the laborer is not the owner of his labor power. He is, but what you apparently mean is that he cannot take advantage of his labor power, because he must sell it (and after the sale, he no longer is the owner). You must criticize capitalism for the laborer not having access to the means of production, without which he cannot take advantage of his labor power, so that all the benefits of his labor accrue to those who monopolize the means of production.

Your last two sentences are:

Labor-power is value, like that of every other commodity, which is already determined before it enters the circulation. But its use-value consists in the subsequent exercise of that power.

This is a tangential point Marx makes in 277:2, in preparation of his argument that the worker lends his labor to the capitalist before he is paid for it. Again, you seem to be picking out random sentences from Marx's text without really understanding the flow of Marx's argument.