It seems interest in human capital, which arose of late, has to do with ineptitude of capital and labor on their own to support empirically any growth path without receding because of diminishing returns (cobb Douglas type as of growth was a purely mechanical asocial process). So add
Paul Phillips said:
The fact that human capital is tracked by class is not really rellevant.
Does one tract physical capital by class? Does a backhoe owned by a
working class person have less value than the backhoe owned by GW Bush?
It's not the notional class of the person which counts
PS: I suppose it might be possible that identical twin siblings, both
proprietors of identical capitalist enterprises, one with an MBA and one
without, had differing rates of accumulation, but even then it wouldn't
necessarily be down to their respective levels of education and/or that
piece of
Message-
From: paul phillips [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Mon 3/22/2004 9:37 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc:
Subject: Re: [PEN-L] human capital again
Michael,
I have read of 'cultural capital
paul phillips wrote:
Michael,
The fact that human capital is tracked by class is not really
rellevant. Does one tract physical capital by class? Does a backhoe
owned by a working class person have less value than the backhoe
owned by GW Bush? Only because of the social status heaped
I think some of the confusion in this thread relates to the fact that
'capital' has two meanings in the economics context. One meaning of
capital is 'stored up dead labour utilized to enhance the productivity
of living labour'; the second, 'a social relation'. Human capital in the
form
michael perelman wrote
Paul, you are certainly familiar with the sheepskin effect -- that what
people earn with their human capital reflects much more their
credentials than their actual knowledge. A substantial literature
within conventional economics confirms this commonsense idea.
I have
112-3: They refer to a plethora of capitals -- human capital,
cultural capital, and even self-command capital..
Baron, James N. and Michael T. Hannan. 1994. The Impact of
Economics on Contemporary Sociology. Journal of Economic
Literature, 32: 3 (September): pp. 111-46.
--
Michael
investment of (labour) resources in creating something of productive (
and productive is the operative word) value.
Human capital is something quite different. Humans invest in
buying knowledge, produced by labour, which increases their
productivity at a later date. In that sense, human capital
Paul, I don't think that human capital is a particularly useful
concept. In the US, student are tracked according to class -- although
it is not official. Even in the absence of tracking, poor students go
to poor schools. So a GW Bush can go and get a Harvard MBA as evidence
of human capital
Michael,
The fact that human capital is tracked by class is not really rellevant.
Does one tract physical capital by class? Does a backhoe owned by a working
class person have less value than the backhoe owned by GW Bush? Only because
of the social status heaped upon BW Bush by his birth
]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2004 3:45 AM
Subject: [PEN-L] human capital again
112-3: They refer to a plethora of capitals -- human capital,
cultural capital, and even self-command capital..
Baron, James N. and Michael T. Hannan. 1994. The Impact of
Economics on Contemporary
There is a more fundamental way in which Marx's approach to capital differs from Becker's and makes the human capital approach an expression of fetishism. The following passages also elaborate the idea of forces of production as an expression of the development of mind i.e
this, is interest of capital; capital expended in their
apprenticeship, in indentures, premium, food, or clothing, or loss of time.
If you follow the entire analysis, it should be clear that not all of this
'human capital' would be 'productive'. In fact, without singling out
Bishops, Barristers
It is a wonderful pamphlet.
--
Michael Perelman
Economics Department
California State University
Chico, CA 95929
Tel. 530-898-5321
E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu
I, too, am no great fan of Becker (indeed the concept of human capital did
not originate with Becker but with Theodore Schultz) but the concept of 'human
capital' is indeed very useful even within a Marxian theoretical framework,
as the quote by Tom indicates. Indeed, although he doesn't use
[was: RE: [PEN-L] Vampire capitalism]
Robert Scott Gassler writes: and Gary Becker thinks human
beings are live capital.
BTW, it's interesting that Marx had a critique of human capital theory in vol. III
of CAPITAL (pp. 465-6 of the Intl. Publ. ed.) two disagreeably frustrating facts mar
There's always Bowie bonds . . .
Robert Scott Gassler writes: and Gary Becker thinks human beings are live
capital.
BTW, it's interesting that Marx had a critique of human capital theory in
vol. III of CAPITAL (pp. 465-6 of the Intl. Publ. ed.) two disagreeably
frustrating facts mar
On 3/19/04, James Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[ . . . human beings are live capital . . . (?) ]
. . . Marx had a critique of human capital theory
in vol. III of CAPITAL (pp. 465-6 of the Intl. Publ.
ed.) two disagreeably frustrating facts mar this
thoughtless conception [of wages being
In the first place, the laborer must work in
order to obtain this interest. ... In the second
place, he cannot transform the capital-value ...
of his labor-power into cash by transferring
it
Jim D.
Max:
There's always Bowie bonds . . .
How about Sabri bonds?
I am issuing them
[it turns out not just the US military is stretched to it's limits]
http://www.senate.gov/~govt-aff/_files/120903yager.pdf
GAO
For Release on Delivery
Expected at 10:00 a.m., EST
Tuesday, December 9, 2003 HUMAN CAPITAL
Significant Challenges
Confront U.S. Trade
Agencies
In recent years
radio broadcast. Either they pay,
or their bones will end up in prison.
Yet another hurdle for the Chavistas is a quiet human capital
strike among the professional classes. There is an internal brain
drain: engineers, accountants and agronomists-hopped-up on
anti-Chavez propaganda -- refuse
Adam Smith:
In this country indeed [Scotland], where the division of
labour is not far advanced, even the meanest porter can read and
write, because the price of education is cheap, and a parent can
employ his child no other way at 6 or 7 years of age. This
however is not the case in
Marx, here sounds like he is following the ideas of Robert Owen, who believed that
education and production could be combined.
In any case, you made an interesting juxtaposition.
--
Michael Perelman
Economics Department
California State University
Chico, CA 95929
Tel. 530-898-5321
E-Mail
Adam Smith:
In this country indeed [Scotland], where the division of
labour is not far advanced, even the meanest porter can read and
write, because the price of education is cheap, and a parent can
employ his child no other way at 6 or 7 years of age. This
however is not the case in the
]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Ken Hanly
Sent: Friday, February 16, 2001 4:40 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:[PEN-L:8210] Re: RE: human "capital"
But dont people often pay for courses that give them skills that make them
more likely to find jobs and hence of
PM
Subject: [PEN-L:8222] RE: Re: RE: human "capital"
human capital theory has been refuted logically, empirically, historically,
theoretically, internally, externally, what possible other ways are there?
Was it Ivar Berg who did the study that showed the best determinant of
employmen
Antonella Stirati and Antonella Picchio both have books where the "classical"
(Classical Political Economy/Marxist) theory of wages (viewed as a key moment in
social reproduction) is elaborated in the context of patriarchy. Deb Figart and
two co-authors have also produced at least one paper along
Jim,
Have you read Paula England's Comparable Worth? In particular, in Chapter
2 -- "Theories of Labor Markets" she writes, "The neoclassical theory of
human capital posits that individuals invest in their stock of skills by
paying and/or forgoing something in the present for t
]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, February 16, 2001 1:56 PM
Subject: [PEN-L:8201] RE: human "capital"
Jim,
Have you read Paula England's Comparable Worth? In particular, in Chapter
2 -- "Theories of Labor Markets" she writes, "The neoclassical theory
Nicole Seibert wrote:
Jim,
Have you read Paula England's Comparable Worth? In particular, in Chapter
2 -- "Theories of Labor Markets" she writes, "The neoclassical theory of
human capital posits that individuals invest in their stock of skills by
paying and/or forgoing something
human capital theory has been refuted logically, empirically, historically,
theoretically, internally, externally, what possible other ways are there?
Was it Ivar Berg who did the study that showed the best determinant of
employment is.who you know. ("social capital"?)
the on
[was: Re: [PEN-L:8031] Re: Re: RE: Social Capital]
At 10:17 AM 2/13/01 -0800, you wrote:
In order to come to grips with this expanded vision of the labor force,
economists devised a new concept. Specifically, they invented a new resource,
which they called, "human capital," a t
Supposedly education and technological competence explains the worsening
distribution of income. What can we make of the following story?
Document 1 of 2.
Copyright 1999 The Atlanta Constitution
The Atlanta Journal and Constitution
Anecdotal stories sell newspapers and work great for talk show host.
I've got a federal study of illiteracy and innumeracy done in the mid-90's
kicking around somewhere---did you know that a certain percentage of people
with graduate degrees are illiterate!(seriously)
Then there are the poor
Mike, I think this one is easy. Workers need human capital.
Capitalists have the other kind.
(And I don't buy the standard line on HK either...)
Peter
michael perelman wrote:
Supposedly education and technological competence explains the worsening
distribution of income. What can we
Does anyone have anything good, including from a feminist standpoint?
Please reply privately...
Thanks comrades!
Patrick Bond
National Institute for Economic Policy, Johannesburg
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Patrick;
One feminist critique of human capital theory is that families tend to invest
more capital in sons than daughters. There is some good work about this in
development literature. In the USA, this is signified by the fact that over
90% of male professionals complete their education
Does anyone know of any good Marxist or left critiques of human capital
theory in the context of economic development?
Jerry
Another really good critique of IQ and of meritocracy is
William Ryan's book Equality.
Rudy
=
+ Rudy Fichtenbaum+ Internet [EMAIL PROTECTED] +
+ Department of Economics + Internet [EMAIL PROTECTED] +
+ Rike
Ray Miller writes:
We begin with the fact that there exist certain tests, which I will call
conventional IQ tests (CIQ), which may measure no human characteristic more
significant than the ability to take CIQ tests. Some people argue that these
tests measure intelligence, whatever that is.
Another take, used inter alia by J. Roemer in Free to Lose: why is it
fair that someone should be rich just because they're smart, anymore
than because they're tall? Or their parents are rich?
(Not that we believe any of this nonsense that there exists some
objective thing called intelligence
42 matches
Mail list logo
