Me, I think we will never overcome scarcity, and chief of all is scarcity of time. That is one reason we need productivity, because life is short. One worry about blowing off productivity is that it leads to an ex-Bloc situation: they pretend to pay us and we pretend to work. That is not an ideal that I would hold forth as something to blazon on our banner in the place of To Each According to his Needs! --jks
>
>
>
>On Mon, 12 Mar 2001, Justin Schwartz wrote:
>
> >
> > I was talking about DIFFERENTIAL pay, for whatever the reason. And I do
> > think incentive effects, another consequentialist consideration, are
>real.
> > And, finally, I do think that people who work harder or contribute more
>(not
> > the same thing) deserve more, another taht does not trump, and I
>recognize
> > that measurement of those "more" factors is a very rough and ready
> > proposition. But hasn't anyone here worked in a na environment where he
>or
> > she had to pick up the work for a slacker who was being paid just as
>much
> > (or more),a nd resented it? Didn't you think that person was in fact
> > exploiting you? That is the experential basis of working class belief in
> > productivity-based pay differentials. --jks
> >
>
>But isn't this concern with maximizing productivity a product of
>capitalist economic relations? You wouldn't have to "pick up the
>work for a slacker" so often if fruits of the labor process were
>widely shared!
>
>Let's face it: it doesn't take a high degree of productivity to
>meet everyone's needs, even in an industrial society. The major
>reason for the emphasis on productivity is that it is crucial for
>extracting surplus value from labor.
>
>I think we'd all be a bit better off with lower levels of
>productivity among workers (even lawyers!) as long as we're able
>to feed and shelter and clothe one another.
>
>Miles
>
_________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com