| This question <67|67> overall <64|66> Deut: <697|130>. graded C |
| Question 92: (a) Why is it necessary for the exchange of commodities that they contain qualitatively different kinds of useful labor? |
| (b) Can commodity production exist without division of labor? |
| (c) Can division of labor exist without commodity production? |
| (d) How does commodity production influence the division of labor? |
| [65] Deut: Commodity and Division of Labor. This is a four-point question. |
| A. If the commodities were the same qualitatively, there would be no point in the exchange of commodities. Trading a coat for a coat will leave you exactly where you were before, holding a coat and no progress. In order to gain a variety of commodities, the exchange of commodities must have qualitatively different kinds of useful labour traded at even quantitative amounts. |
| B. No, even if a commodity was made by one man, he must switch his labours to a different labour (weaving to tailoring is Marx's example), to finish the commodity. That is division of labor. |
| C. Yes, a man can weave his fabric, then divide his labour to tailor the fabric into a coat for himself and thus not becoming a commodity. |
| D. As the process of creating a commodity becomes known, the process is socially divided into divisions of labour which becomes accepted as the way it is done and this social division of labour is a “precondition of commodity production” (Ehrbar pg. 53). |
| Hans: Your submission had an unacceptable number of typos and spelling errors. I corrected it in the main text, but here is as it was submitted, with exclamation points marking the mis-spelled words. I also tagged “labor” because you can either write consistently “labor” or consistently “labour”, but both spellings in the same document are a mistake. |
| This is a four point question. |
| A. If the commodities were the same qualitively!, there would be no point in the exchange of commodtities!. Trading a coat for a coat will leave you exactly where you were before, holding a coat and no progress. In order to gain a variety of commodities, the exbhange! of commoditeis! must have qualitively! different kinds of useful labor! traded at even quantitive! amounts. |
| B. No, even if a commodity was made by one man, he must switch his labours to a different labout! (weaving to tailoring is Marx's example), to finish the commodity. That is division of labor!. |
| C. Yes, a man can weave his fabric, than! divide his labor! to tailor the fabric into a coat for himself and thus not becoming a commodity. |
| D. As the process of creating a commodity becomes known, the process is socially fevided! into devisions! of labour which becomes accepted as the way it is done and this social division of labour is a “precondition of commdity! production” (Ehrbar pg. 53). |
|
|
|||||