>
>> Hi Michael,
>
>Hi Marta --- I seem to be still on here -- or at any rate I got this
>message.
>
>I am am supposed to be off -- getting them later in a bunch...
>
>> "Socially valuable" being defined as work is going to butt
>> heads against the disabled people's movement. The concept
>> instantly devalues the impaired body which may be incapable
>> of producing in the sense you speak of.
>
>It does no such thing...at least that I can see -- so you will need to
>explain...
>
>But I may not get your reply for awhile, if I get off...please note.
>
>It says there is socially valued work, and not. That is a fact. Me
>painting murals would not be socially valued, nor me playing shortstop,
>or the violin, or who knows how many other things.
>
>Someone with eyes like mine, for that matter, driving trucks would also
>not be socially valued -- actually, it would a social disaster.
>
>What parecon says is if a person can do socially valued labor --then
>their remunration will be for that -- whatever they settle on
>doing...for effort and sacrifice.
>
>On the other hand, if one can't do socially valued labor, presumably for
>health reasons, one simply gets an average income by virtue of being a
>person. Likewie, specally medical needs in a parecon are undoubtedly
>covered by social insurance, which everyone has.
>
>> While many disabled workers are denied the opportunity to
>> work either due to discrimination of not getting an
>> accommodation on the job, it still remains that there are
>> those who will not be "productive" in the sense of making
>> products. Now, these people are marginalized, cast off as
>> useless under capitalism.
>
>Yes, but not in a parecon. Though surely we wouldn't ask someone to do
>something they can't do, much less require it of them, for them to have
>an income.
>
>> The right to be different may include a right not to produce
>> anything and still remain a valuable part of society.
>
>You don't have to produce anything to be valued -- of course. Nor do you
>have to produce to be entitled to social product -- if you honestly
>can't. But if you can, you do -- or that's the norm in a parecon, at any
>rate.
>
>> How does Parecon deal with this matter?
>
>I am not sure what the matter is we would be dealing with.
>
>What is socially valued or not is not the person, but particular
>actions, labors, by people.
>
>___________________________________
>http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk