Editing Labour power (section)

==The reproduction of workers==

Marx himself argued that:
{{cquote|"The maintenance and reproduction of the working-class is, and must ever be, a necessary condition to the reproduction of capital. But the capitalist may safely leave its fulfilment to the labourer's instincts of self-preservation and of propagation. All the capitalist cares for, is to reduce the labourer's individual consumption as far as possible to what is strictly necessary..."<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/ch23.htm|title=Economic Manuscripts: Capital Vol. I - Chapter Twenty-Three|author=Karl Marx|work=marxists.org}}</ref> }}

This understanding, however, only captures the sense in which the reproduction of labour power comes at no cost to capitalists, like the reproduction of ecological conditions, but unlike the reproduction of, say, machine bolts and plastic wrap. Elites and governments have always sought to actively intervene or mediate in the process of the reproduction of labour power, through family legislation, laws regulating sexual conduct, medical provisions, education policies, and housing policies. Such interventions always carry an economic cost, but that cost can be socialized or forced upon workers themselves, especially women. In these areas of civil society, there has been a constant battle between conservatives, social reformists and radicals.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=HARVEY|first=PHILIP|date=1983|title=Marx's Theory of the Value of Labor Power: An Assessment|journal=Social Research|volume=50|issue=2|pages=305–344|jstor=40970881|issn=0037-783X}}</ref>

Marxist-Feminists have argued that in reality, household (domestic) labour by housewives which forms, maintains and restores the capacity to work is a large "free gift" to the capitalist economy. [[Time use survey]]s show that formally unpaid and voluntary labour is a very large part of the total hours worked in a society. Markets depend on that unpaid labour to function at all.  Some feminists have therefore demanded that the government pay "wages for housework". This demand conflicts with the legal framework of the government in capitalist society, which usually assumes a financial responsibility only for the upkeep of "citizens" and "families" lacking other sources of income or subsistence.  

Other social scientists have tackled this issue from a supercapitalist perspective.  Economist Shirley P. Burggraf's [[parental dividend]] concept proposes the replacement of existing government payments to the elderly based on an individual's payroll tax contributions (e.g. [[Social Security (United States)|US Social Security]]), with a new system granting retirement benefits proportional to the income of one's own children. Such a system could theoretically introduce a return on investment for [[reproductive labor]], thereby incentivizing the care and rearing of children.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Burggraf |first=Shirley |title=The Feminine Economy and Economic Man |publisher=Addison-Wesley |year=1997 |isbn=978-0738200361 |edition=Updated |location=Reading, Massachusetts |language=English}}</ref>