> Autoplectic: that was my point...read the last two sentences
-------------------------
I disagreed with your last sentence which, as I understood it was about a problem within KM's theory; i.e. whether the ltv is an empirically valid hypothesis given the ubiquitous use of a ineliminably normatively loaded term in his work.
If unpaid labor isn't one of the ultimate rip-off's in society why the expenditure of all the outrage and the attempt to measure the rip-off within an exquisite model of Victorian era capitalism given the concepts available to him, along with all the subsequent claims of calling it a weapon for the working class yada yada?