| This question <65|58> overall <89|91> Hans: <89|92>. |
| Question 72: What is the difference between labor and labor power? |
| [90] Hans: Labor power need not be a commodity The second of the two answers to 72, MsMarx's [65], is very good. The only thing MsMarx overlooks is that under commodity production labor power exists and has real economic effects even if it is not a commodity itself. |
| Here is the other answer, Chuck's [58], with my comments: |
| Labor is the human act of producing an actual commodity. |
| By an “actual commodity” you apparently mean what Marx calls the “body” of the commodity, the physical thing that makes up the commodity. (A commodity is more than a physical thing; it is a physical thing endowed with social powers). |
| labor in turn produces use value. |
| This sentence seems to be a re-wording of the first sentence, using Marx's terminological convention to write “a use value” instead of “the body of a commodity”. But why did you write “in turn”? |
| Labor power on the other hand is the average amount of labor that every unit of labor gives. |
| Look at this sentence closely; it does not make any sense. We are using email here so that we can formulate our thoughts a little more carefully than that. |
| Labor power is the amount of effort and the skill level that is required in order to produce a good. |
| This might be a possible explication of the phrase “labor power is potential labor”, but it does not convey the universality of labor power. It is a central aspect of Marx's definition of labor power that the same labor power can give rise to various kinds of labor. Your definition should be rephrased along the following lines: “labor power is the ability to exert goal-directed effort, and to learn and use various skills, in order to produce various commodities.” |
|
|
|||||