>I'm not talking about an individual doctor, but doctors as a group - or more broadly, self-employed professionals as a class or subclass.
My point was that professionals aren't all part of the same class merely by virtue of holding a particular degree. It should be determined individually. My complaint was that you take this view that self-employed professionals are all part of the same class. But their objective class status depends, surely, on more than a piece of paper and a shingle?
>It's weird to hear that being a boss or being bossed is irreleveant to one's class position in society. A prison guard isn't a "boss" in the sense I was using it, even though s/he may get to shove around inmates.
Unfortunately there are those who hold to the notion that the overseer is in the same class as the slave owner, to draw a parallel. Good to hear you're not one of them.
> S/he has not influence over the productive labor of others. But in a society where the function of the capitalist has been socialized - execs, shareholders, and investment bankers all members of that socialized capitalist class, but individual capitalists are relatively rare - it's one of the easiest measures we've got of one's position in the hierarchy.
True, but position in the hierarchy isn't quite the same as class. Being anywhere in the hierarchy by dint of economic necessity, means you are part of the working class.
>
>What kind of job would a "capitalist" (Rupert Murdoch? Robert Rubin? Martha Stewart? who?) "choose" (under what notion of compulsion and/or freedom is this "choice" made?) to get? Certainly not prison guard. CEO of a multinational? Vineyard owner in the Barossa Valley?
Well it happens. I saw somewhere that the widow Onassis took a job in a publishing firm for a while. She would have had to be considered a full member of the capitalist class no matter how you cut it. On a less grand scale of capitalist, there are many people who don't really need to work, but who get themselves jobs and often have a boss as part of that.
The real significant difference between them and the rest of us is that they don't need the job, or at least it isn't an economic necessity. So the crucial "notion of compulsion and/or freedom" is the economic one. I'm not talking about social/cultural and/or psychological compulsion here. It is whether they are compelled to work because this is how they get their daily bread. As a matter of fact Rupert Murdock still works in the 'family business'. Whether he needs to or not seems to depend on how deep he's in at any given time, but I don't think the poor fellow can help himself either way.
But the class status of self-employed professionals is somewhat misunderstood. Many are employers of labour of course, yet at the same time there are quite a lot that can't be said to get much of their income from their employees' exploited labour. One problem is that having a medical degree doesn't automatically mean you have the aptitude to manage a business. (Its an entirely different skill.) Same goes for lawyer, in spades. Though these professionals do have the advantage of a government regulated monopoly, which helps a lot since it enables them to charge ridiculous fees. But a lot of them can't manage despite this.
Of course the thing to remember is that their ability to charge extortionate fees for essential services which they monopolise doesn't put them in the same class as a capitalist, precisely because their skill can only be sold in association with their labour. The killer is that they often don't own the socially necessary capital infrastructure necessary to carry on their business. They often have to rent equipment, business premises and other necessary infrastructure from capitalists. If they don't rent infrastructure directly, they borrow, which has much the same effect, except that the surplus value is extracted from them in the form of interest rather than rent.
The upshot of this is that they find their labour being exploited just as if they were an employee. Often more so. The same applies to most small business operators, they may be exploiting their employees savagely, but it doesn't free the operator from the need to work, because they aren't able to hang on to the surplus value they extract from their employees.
They are forced to hand that on to their financiers, landlords etc. To the people who own the capital they need. To the actual capitalists. They are lucky if they get to keep the full value of their own personal labour. They are not being exploited in a direct employer/employee relationship, but the effect is the same and often worse.
It is capital that makes the capitalist. Lacking sufficient capital to free you from the need to work, it follows logically that you are working class. The class of self employed professionals will thus be determined by whether they have enough capital.
One can only be an "independent producer" if one can produce goods without the need for capital. As someone mentioned, 100 years ago or more farmers could be said to be independent producers. But in those days farm land didn't really have much capital value. They were still giving it away here 100 years ago. Likewise, farming was labour-intensive, it was possible to produce goods for sale with little other than sheer hard work. That isn't possible anymore, the socially necessary cost of production of agricultural produce has fallen massively and that ort of farming is hopelessly inefficient. You need machinery and lots of it, to make a living. Owning, renting or borrowing to finance the land and machinery puts the farmer in the position of being exploited by the capitalists who finance the farm business.
I really can't think of any substantial business or industry that isn't reliant on substantial capital investment. But is one were to operate such a business, one would be in a different class that either capitalist or worker. Trouble is, if it was that easy you'd have a hell of a lot of competition too, so you might find it impossible making a living in a business that anyone can walk into because you don't need any money to operate.
Let's face it, all of the professions require a substantial capital investment, just to buy the degree.
Bill Bartlett Bracknell Tas