I hate to sound like J-P Sartre, who insisted on following "consciousness" with 
"of" all the time, but one key question is what kind of "growth" are we talking 
about? "growth" of _what_? The orthodox economics & business view is that 
"growth" is of real GDP, which is Good. In that case, "growth" means the growth 
of exchange-value (adjusted for inflation). Given capitalist power, Tom's 
absolutely right that "Ultimately what growth refers to is the accumulation of 
capital." 
 
One could also talk about the growth of use-value. Perhaps a first 
approximation for that would be something like the Genuine Progress Indicator 
or some other GDP-substitute. Of course, there's a contradiction between 
exchange-value (surplus-value) and use-value, as some hairy old Teutons noted. 
 
Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://myweb.lmu.edu/jdevine 

________________________________

From: PEN-L list on behalf of tom walker
Sent: Thu 3/10/2005 10:02 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [PEN-L] Worker rights versus growth



Bill Lear wrote:

> At dinner this evening a friend of mine made the
> claim that the easier
> it is to fire workers, the better the growth rate of
> the economy ---
> "That's Germany's problem right now", he said,
> perhaps with good
> reason.
>
> Is there any empirical support or refutation of
> this?

I think it is a mistake to view this question as an
empirical one that can be empirically refuted. The
growth v. rights framing is an ideological one that
can only be addressed through a fundamental rejection
of the paradigm of economic growth. And I don't mean
that you, Bill, will necessarily be able to persuade
your friend that this growth shit is a bogus concept.
I simply mean that it is naive to think that empirical
evidence will turn the trick.

Ultimately what growth refers to is the accumulation
of capital. Even though it may well be that within a
particular regime of accumulation worker rights are
compatible with capital accumulation, eventually the
universal extention of those rights stands in
opposition to the continued accumulation of capital.
Capital will therefore oppose even the accumulation of
capital that relies on the univeral extension of
worker rights. What do you think the role of
ol'Greensponge squarebob is?

Personally, I think the question can better be
addressed through allegory and emblem than through
analysis and evidence. Your friend didn't arrive at
his  claim through analysis and evidence. What makes
people think he will abandon it through that route?

The Sandwichman

______________________________________________________________________
Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca

Reply via email to