Rakesh Bhandari wrote:
That is, did the limit to accumulation become the shortage of easily
exploitable labor?
Overtime was reaching heights during the boom, it seems.
Businesspeople constantly complain about the lack of qualified labor.
I saw a press release just the other day from some
I don't consider myself a social democrat, but I agree with Jim -- if I
understand him correctly. SD is good for the capitalists. That does not
make it the Valhalla for others. It is merely a social form that reduces
conflict and thus improves efficiency.
michael, social forms that
Michael Perelman wrote:
I don't consider myself a social democrat, but I agree with Jim -- if I
understand him correctly. SD is good for the capitalists.
So why do they generally oppose social democracy? Don't they
understand their own interests?
And when are those contradictions of
On Tuesday, January 15, 2002 at 14:15:22 (-0500) Doug Henwood writes:
Michael Perelman wrote:
I don't consider myself a social democrat, but I agree with Jim -- if I
understand him correctly. SD is good for the capitalists.
So why do they generally oppose social democracy? Don't they
the profitrate recession
by Rakesh Bhandari
15 January 2002 18:28 UTC
michael, social forms that domesticate the class struggle are
obviously to the advantage of the capitalist class. whether the
capitalist class can afford to do so by allowing wages to increase to
maintain or lessen
This is an argument against strawpeople. I'm still waiting to hear
what type of working class demands the Rakesh-Fred,-Mattick's
analysis ( that recession is caused by falling profits and
investment) imply. Or is it that they consider all reform demands
revisionist Marxism ?
Grossmann
