Sure, but first it needs to be pointed out that an individual's class does not depend in any way on whether an that person creates value. For example, I am a dole bludger. I try to avoid creating any value. But I'm still working class.
Tahir: I beg to differ. I am not talking about classifying individuals here so much as characterising the class, and the creation of value is very much part of my notion of the class, just as the extraction of surplus value is part of my notion of capital. As for the dole issue (I'm afraid I don't know what a 'bludger' is) this appears to contradict your often repeated definition of the class as people who have to work for a living - if you can collect dole then in what sense are you forced to work for a living?
But anyhow, housework is a socially necessary part of the infrastructure that supports wage workers. Without it, those who sell their labour wouldn't be able to survive. Housework is essential to capital, in the sense that without it all employers would be required to provide full board and accommodation to their labour force.
Tahir: What if capital decided somehow to remunerate housework and cut the remuneration of the (male) worker accordingly? Isn't this where the wages for housework movement might lead?
Some do of course, I once worked at the BHP steel mill in Whyalla, boarding at the company's single men's quarters. As well as a bed, the company provided all meals, even a cut lunch.
Tahir: Did they provide prostitutes as well?
There was a fee for all this of course, but I don't imagine it would have covered cost. It was worth their while to subsidise it though, since it permitted BHP to continually import fresh migrant workers from all over the world, thus undermining wages and conditions. I had four good mates there, one was from Franco's Spain (the Basque country), two were from Peru, and the fourth was a white South African. They seemed to prefer importing labour from depressed areas (including Tasmania.)
I'm a little surprised that you would not understand how housework creates value. It really is essentially the same sort of work done in restaurants, hotels, etc by cooks, waiters, laundry workers, maids, cleaners and so forth. Do you doubt that it creates value to prepare raw food for eating, to clean laundry rather than throw away soiled clothes, etc?
Tahir: I was looking to see if you had anything to add to what I already know.
It seems obvious that clean clothes are more valuable than soiled ones, that a meal ready to eat has more value than a raw cut of meat, etc. Or am I missing your point here?
Tahir: I meant value in the marxist sense, value for capital.
> That's what I'm interested in here. Your definition of working class is something we've been through already. Class composition is what I'm on about right now - this interests me much more than definitions, and this is what my question is about.
I don't see how you can distinguish between class definitions and class composition. You can't just skip over the question of class definition as being 'too hard'.
Tahir: On the contrary, I find your definition too simplistic, and since I already know it I don't need to ask anymore.