[lbo-talk] service coops (was Servant culture)

[Liza Featherstone]

Though as the explanation in Nickle and Dimed makes pretty clear, the
services are potentially more exploitative  because the clients' money is
not going directly to the worker - the service takes a big fat cut, and
workers get peanuts. If you were going to spend the money to have someone
clean your house, wouldn't you want to make sure that person, rather than a
corporation, got as much of your money as you could afford --with all due
qualifications on the word "afford" -- to pay them? The only advantage I can
see to the service is it removes the consumer from the uncomfortable
position of acting as capitalist boss, but in fact this very comfort is
purchased at the worker's expense. LIke Kelley in her many great posts on
this topic, I'm obviously not trying to make anyone who does this FEEL bad,
just agreeing that it's important to think these things through.


> From: andie nachgeborenen <andie_nachgeborenen at yahoo.com>
> Reply-To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org
> Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2003 10:50:34 -0700 (PDT)
> To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org
> Subject: Re: [lbo-talk] service coops (was Servant culture)
> 
> No, actually, I hadn't read Brad's post, which in fact
> I rather liked, the praise for NCE aside. I agree with
> the people who say that it's not a political act to
> deal with your guilt on an individual basis. I agree
> with Kells that I'd rather deal with a service, though
> I am not sure I grasp the political reason for doing
> so, but there are practical reasons, like bombing,
> licemnsing, insurance, screening for the employer,a nd
> gettiung your social security and maybe benefits paid
> for the employee. jks
> 
> 
> --- Luke Weiger <lweiger at umich.edu> wrote:
>> 
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "andie nachgeborenen"
>> <andie_nachgeborenen at yahoo.com>
>> To: <lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org>
>> Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2003 12:22 PM
>> Subject: RE: [lbo-talk] service coops (was Servant
>> culture)
>> 
>> 
>>> So non-feminists are like shabbas goys, they can
>> hire
>>> and exploit domestics? Because after all, as Joan
>>> Robinson oncew said, the only thing worse, in a
>>> capiatlist economy, than being exploited, is not
>> being
>>> exploited.
>> 
>> This appears to be a gibe a Brad, and yet you say
>> below that you'd be more
>> than happy to have a housekeeper.  What gives?
>> 
>> -- Luke
>> 
>> ___________________________________
>> 
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
> 
> 
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
> http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk