[lbo-talk] Ehrenreich responds to BDL

[Brad DeLong]

>Brad DeLong:
>>  I don't think that the argument is that the cash nexus is inherently
>>  corrosive. I think that the argument is that the cash nexus combined
>>  with tenfold differences in wealth is inherently corrosive.
>>
>>  I'm not sure whether or not the argument makes sense, myself...
>
>Wealth?  Vast differences in wealth are not necessarily producing
>exploitative employment relations - social status differences do.
>Service workers earn less because of their lowly social status (as
>feminists and segmented labor market folks have argued) rather than
>because of the quality of their work or a wealth difference between
>vendor and emptor.
>
>Restaurants are a case in point.  Waiting on tables in a greasy spoon
>joint is paid considerably less than waiting on tables in a 5-star
>restaurant, even though the waiter/patron wealth differential is much
>higher in the 5-star restaurant than in the greasy spoon joint.  What
>makes the difference is the social prestige of these two places - which
>explains not only wage differences but also who will work where.
>
>PS. I do not buy Kelley's argument that service employment relations
>spoil social solidarity either.  Labor unionism suggests to the
>contrary.  What is more, Michael is absolutely correct that replacing
>cash relations with social/kin relations can be extremely exploitative
>(c.f. patriarchy).
>
>Wojtek

Well argued, but I'm not sure I agree. I don't think there can be 
durable social status differences that do not grow out of and are not 
reflected in wealth differences...

Brad DeLong