School has slowly eroded my ability to sleep and do much, which is why I am still up on a Friday, excuse me, Saturday morning at 2AM pondering Marx & Engels.
I was rereading Marx and Engels, and I couldn't quite understand what M&E meant by this statement and hoped you guys could provide some thoughts on the matter.
So on pg.206 at the bottom, M&E talk about how the cost of production of simple labor power is equal to the subsistence the worker requires to survive and "reproduction" (206). But what exactly does M&E mean by reproduction? Reproduction of the worker? Reproduction of the skills needed to help that new worker obtain the same such skills? What does he mean?
I was further confused by what he meant by the "wage minimum...does not hold good for the single individual but for the species" (206). Double negatives screw with my brain and I am confused as to whether it is beneficial for the individual or not, or for the species or not and why is it beneficial or not beneficial for either party?
My last point of confusion is about "individual workers...do not get enough to be able to exist and reproduce themselves; but the wages of the whole working class level down, within their fluctuations, to this minimum" (206). Do individual workers not get enough for subsistence for their own lives because some people of their species/same jobs need less subsistence and as a result, the required wages given out are lowered than what some individuals may need?
What are your thoughts?
- So on pg.206 at the bottom, M&E talk about how the cost of production of simple labor power is equal to the subsistence the worker requires to survive and "reproduction" (206). But what exactly does M&E mean by reproduction? Reproduction of the worker? Reproduction of the skills needed to help that new worker obtain the same such skills? What does he mean?
ReplyDeleteBeginning of second to last paragraph on pg 206: "The cost of production of simple labour power, therefore, amounts to the COST OF EXISTENCE AND REPRODUCTION OF THE WORKER." I think Marx is saying that the worker is essentially treated as a machine: "Thus the depreciation of the worker is taken into account in the same way as the depreciation of the machine" (pg 206). He means (I believe) the DOUBLE reproduction of the worker: both for offspring (the continuation of the worker class as people) and as workers (the reproduction of the skill set, the worker AS a worker).
-I was further confused by what he meant by the "wage minimum...does not hold good for the single individual but for the species" (206). Double negatives screw with my brain and I am confused as to whether it is beneficial for the individual or not, or for the species or not and why is it beneficial or not beneficial for either party?
So in that second to last paragraph Marx is saying that the wage minimum are the "cost of existence and reproduction." When he says it does not hold true for the individual, but for the species, I believe he is saying the following: The wage minimum is the bare minimum cost to keep a worker reproducing as we discussed above. However, not every worker gets paid that minimum. In fact, "millions of workers, do not get enough to be able to exist and reproduce themselves." But, as a species, that is as a CLASS, this holds true. The point is that millions of workers do not meet even this BARE MINIMUM standards (the wage minimum), but it holds true for the class, in aggregate.
-My last point of confusion is about "individual workers...do not get enough to be able to exist and reproduce themselves; but the wages of the whole working class level down, within their fluctuations, to this minimum" (206). Do individual workers not get enough for subsistence for their own lives because some people of their species/same jobs need less subsistence and as a result, the required wages given out are lowered than what some individuals may need?
- I believe Marx is saying that since workers are just like machines, and since there are millions and millions of them, it works out that not everyone gets paid enough to meet the wage minimum, and therefore those who do not discontinue to reproduce. But on the whole people meet this. As to the leveling down, it seems that Marx is saying that the entire class will eventually be paid this wage minimum, even if currently they are being paid above the minimum, and that's one of his general wage laws. In today's world that does not seem to hold true for America's middle class, but it might hold true for the manufacturing workers in China, India, Malaysia, etc. Perhaps, and I don't know here, as they start demanding greater wages, the capitalists move to different locations and continue to press the wage to this bare minimum.
Hope this helps!