The worker does not sell labour, nor the product of their labour, to the capitalist, but their labour-power. In doing so, they put that labour-power, that ability to perform labour, at the disposal of the capitalist, for a given, contracted period of time, say 12 hours a day, six days a week. Exactly how long this contracted period is is not determined by the value of labour-power, but by the general social conditions existing in society, i.e. the social relations existing, between capital and labour.
It will never be the case that capital will knowingly employ labour for a shorter duration than is required to cover the wages paid to the worker, because capital is only advanced in order to produce a profit. So, the capitalist will always be in the driving seat, in this relation. The worker, now, no longer having their own means of production, must sell their labour-power, in order to live. But, the capitalist can simply live off their own capital. They only allow the worker to work if they agree to work for a sufficient period to produce the required surplus value, i.e. to provide the capitalist with free labour. Competition between workers for available employment, pushes wages down to the value of their labour-power.
That is why the notions about the workers “obtaining the full fruits of their labour” are utopian nonsense. Were that the case, there would be no profit, and so no capital advanced. But, as Marx, also, sets out, in The Critique of The Gotha Programme, its also impossible under Socialism too, because a surplus is required for accumulation and so on.
However, at certain times, conditions may be more or less favourable to workers. When capital expands, rapidly, more workers are employed, and the simple laws of supply and demand push up wages at the expense of profits. Its here that Smith's explanation of crises of overproduction of capital, as also set out by Marx, in Capital III, Chapter 15, and Theories of Surplus Value, Chapter 21, apply. But, capital has a response to this too. In Capital III, Chapter 15, Marx notes,
“Given the necessary means of production, i.e., a sufficient accumulation of capital, the creation of surplus-value is only limited by the labouring population if the rate of surplus-value, i.e., the intensity of exploitation, is given; and no other limit but the intensity of exploitation if the labouring population is given.”
So, capital responds to this squeeze on profit, caused by an overproduction of capital/lack of supply of labour, by engaging in technological innovation. New machines raise productivity so that the existing output can be produced with less labour. A relative surplus population is created, the laws of supply and demand, now cause wages to fall, and profits to rise.
Engels briefly describes what Marx sets out at length in Capital I, that it does not matter whether the wages take the form of time-wages, or piece wages. The latter are calculated on the basis that the average worker would produce a given number of pieces in the normal working day. Consequently, whilst some workers might produce more (and so get higher wages), others produce less, so that the total paid in wages is the same. It does, however, encourage workers to work faster on average.
“In our present-day capitalist society, labour-power is a commodity like any other, and yet quite a peculiar commodity. It has, namely, the peculiar property of being a value-creating power, a source of value, and, indeed, with suitable treatment, a source of more value than it itself possesses. With the present state of production, human labour-power not only produces in one day a greater value than it itself possesses and costs; with every new scientific discovery, with every new technical invention, the surplus of its daily product over its daily cost increases, and therefore that portion of the labour day, in which the worker works to produce the replacement of his day's wage decreases; consequently, on the other hand, that portion of the labour day in which he has to make a present of his labour to the capitalist without being paid for it increases.” (p 12)
No comments:
Post a Comment