The only way additional profit could be made here is by reducing wages. But, to sustainably reduce wages, below the value of labour-power, would require a surplus population that could be used up. And, as Marx says, in Capital III, Chapter 15, above, in conditions where capital had expanded to this extent, and raised the demand for labour-power, rather than reducing wages, it would face rising wages. Its why, under such circumstances, capital seeks to recruit workers' families into the workforce. In that way, it increases the labour supply, whilst reducing the need for a single workers' wage to have to provide for the whole family. It is also why, during such periods, it encourages immigration, or, where such a reserve exists, encourages peasant producers off the land, and into the factories. In other words, when capital faces the constraint that it cannot increase absolute surplus value, by increasing the individual working-day further (including with the payment of overtime rates) it has to increase the length of the social working-day, by increasing the number of simultaneously employed workers. In the 1950's, and 60's, as capital began to face this constraint, it used all of these kinds of methods. The introduction of domestic appliances, expansion of nursery education, and the welfare state, not only meant that a whole swathe of domestic production of use values, was brought within the realm of social production, and thereby of exchange-value, and consequently surplus value production, it also meant that millions of additional labourers were thereby released from this domestic labour, to become wage workers.
The products of these domestic labourers, usually married women, represented a huge amount of value production that was outside the realm of exchange-value. As soon as the individual value of the products of that domestic labour exceeded the value of their equivalents, now produced as commodities, it started to become possible for those domestic producers to use their labour-time as wage workers, rather than as domestic labourers. The real turning point comes where the value of their labour-power, sold as a wage worker, exceeds the value of their domestic production, which they can now buy instead as commodities on the market. In other words, an automatic washing machine, replaces the day's labour previously required to wash the household's clothes; fitted carpets along with electric vacuum cleaners, means that instead of a day's labour being required to scrub tiled floors, a few hours are required to clean carpets; the introduction of state provided nursery schools, frees mothers from childcare labour for several hours per day, which they can now sell as wage labour, during that time, and so on.
In addition, during this time, developed capitalist economies encourage additional immigration, as Britain did, by encouraging immigration from the Caribbean etc. Moreover, as the organic composition of capital rises in agriculture, the move from agricultural employment, began in the 19th century, continues to occur, providing a steady supply of former agricultural workers into the towns and cities.
But, when all of these alternatives are exhausted, the only way to enable a greater mass of surplus value to be produced is by reducing the value of labour-power, by raising the level of technology and productivity, so that the workers' needs can be produced in a smaller number of hours.
“This is where Hodgskin’s view merges with the general law which I have outlined.” (p 311)
No comments:
Post a Comment