Jim is right that accumulation can place in various ways but a peasant-based economy, turning collective, and then creating an industrial base from a very primitive technological base must be based on lengthening the day. Here the state, in the absence of capitalists, have been the master exploiter. Only much later with learning by doing other forms of surplus extraction take over. Japan, Korea, Taiwan, Singapore all had long working days and all of them have had considerable competent states in guiding development trajectories. All of them enjoy varying forms of democratic rights, perhaps not in the usual liberal sense. China, however, is a real test case but then its size is nothing like the other four. In other words cheap labor hasn't quite been exhausted but it's getting there. And the pressure to re-evaluate the yuan, worker strikes, human rights pressure, etc. are also pushing for a turning point.
Cheers, Anthony On Sat, Jun 19, 2010 at 2:48 AM, Jim Devine <[email protected]> wrote: > Anthony D'Costa wrote: > > Long hours is necessary for surplus generation. There is no short cut to > > it. It's a matter of throughput. > > Charlie Andrews wrote: > > Apparently not. > > > > "Moscow passed additional labor laws in October 1940. ... The standard > > workday increased from seven to eight hours, and the work week increased > > from five of each six day period to six of each seven day period." > > (Walter S. Dunn, The Soviet economy and the Red Army, 1930-1945, > > Praeger, 1995, p. 41 per Google Books) > > > > Another source said the seven hour day had been introduced in the early > > 1930s. > > > > In other words, while the Soviet Union was industrializing at a rapid > > pace but not yet on war footing, their work week, converting to a > > seven-day calendar week, was 41 hours. > > there are several ways to raise the rate of accumulation: > > 1) stretch out the working day; > > 2) depress the real wage; > > 3) increase labor productivity (output per unit of labor-power hired) > so that the same real wage can be received but costs less labor-time > by either: > > a) increasing the intensity of labor (the amount of labor done per > hour of labor-power hired) via speed-up or > > b) increasing the effectiveness of labor (output per unit of labor done). > > 4) reduce the relative role of overhead labor; or > > 5) dedicate a larger percentage of the surplus-value to accumulation. > > the first two are absolute surplus value extraction (though Marx > stressed only #1 in CAPITAL). The third is relative surplus-value > extraction. The fourth refers to reducing the role of indirectly > productive or unproductive labor. The final one would involve reducing > luxury spending. > > though there were limits on the workweek in the USSR during the 1930s, > to what extent were the rules broken? to what extent were they evaded > via real wage cuts or speed-up? and to what extent was accumulation > successful? Soviet products were not known for their high quality. > -- > Jim Devine > "Those who take the most from the table > Teach contentment. > Those for whom the taxes are destined > Demand sacrifice. > Those who eat their fill speak to the hungry > of wonderful times to come. > Those who lead the country into the abyss > Call ruling too difficult > For ordinary folk." – Bertolt Brecht. > _______________________________________________ > pen-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l > -- xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Anthony P. D'Costa Professor of Indian Studies and Research Director Asia Research Centre Copenhagen Business School Porcelænshaven 22, 3 DK-2000 Frederiksberg, Denmark Ph: +45 3815 2572 Fax: +45 3815 2500 http://uk.cbs.dk/arc www.cbs.dk/india http://www.thisismodernindia.com/this_is_modern_india_about_us.html xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
_______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
