Abstract

We discussed the “Division of labour Part 1” at a length in previous issue (issue 3) of FIRM. Here we shall take up a discussion on very sensitive and vital part of this article. We learned from the previous discussion that process of division of labour simultaneously emerged with the classical coordination as one of its inseparable organs. The originally evolved process of division of labour was without unethical influence of human characteristics.

Here we shall discuss how it got contaminated unethically. Parental yearns/sentiments towards their kids in developed social system and investing their resources unethically to protect their incompetent kids, the process of settlement of fresh generation as per their typical abilities and unethical practice there in as well as vital influencing parameters on the same, felt necessity of the time to maintain association with or among two or various habitations/societies, migration of people and knowledge they carried with them, also amalgamation of knowledge between two societies caused a grass root influence on the process of division of labour. I have peeped into the process of settlement of population of fresh generation. It is also discussed on reflections emerged from unethical practices in the process of division of labour and their impacts on the same. Nature and profile of division of labour in the social environment is discussed along with consequential effect of breach of preconditions on the process of division of labour. Lastly some joint conclusions on Part 1 and Part 2 are narrated.

Keywords: exchange value, imaginary line, preconditions, typical abilities, barbaric abilities, natural abilities, gyp and classical coordination.

JEL Classification: A13, A14, B21, F43, F50, I24, O12, P16, P26, P48, Z1.

Cite as: H. Dave. (2018). Elementary investigation on Division of Labour- Part 2. Financial Markets, Institutions and Risks, 2(4), 39-56. DOI: http://doi.org/10.21272/fmir.2(4).39-56.2018

References

1. Thompson Michael J. (2016). Introduction: What Is Critical Theory? Department of Political Science, William Paterson University, Wayne, NJ, 07470, USA, The Palgrave Handbook of Critical Theory, doi.10.1057/978-1-137-55801-5_1].
2. Lefteris Tsoulfidis. (2017). Economic theory in historical perspective. The journal of Philosophical economics: Reflections on economic and social issues, 10(2) – ISSN 1843-2298].
3. Human Requirements and Division of Labor Under the Rule of Private Property and Under Socialism. Division of Labor in Bourgeois Society. Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844. Third Manuscript.
4. David Ricardo. (1951). The works and correspondence of Edited by Piero Sraffa with the Collaboration of M. H. Dobb, Volume 1, On the Principles of Political Economy and Taxation, liberty fund, Indianapolis.
5. S. M. Mac Vane. (1893). The Austrian Theory of Value. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 4, 12-41, Published by: Sage Publications, Inc. in association with the American Academy of Political and Social Science Retrieved from: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1009036, Accessed: 06-06-2018 04:32 UTC.
6. Progress and poverty – An inquiry into the cause of industrial Depressions and of increase of want with increase of wealth, The remedy By Henry George.
7. Robert Schalkenbach (1935). Foundation, 11 park places, New York.
8. Mikael Stenkula Carl (2003). Menger and the network theory of money -. [Euro. J. History of Economic Thought 10:4 587–606 Winter, Mikael Stenkula, Department of Economics, Lund University, PO Box 7082, S-220 07, Lund, Sweden.]
9. General systems theory. The skeleton of science, Kenneth E. Boulding, Institute for Operations Research and the Management Sciences, 901 Elkridge Landing Road, Suite 400, Linthicum, Maryland 21090, USA.
10. Emile Durkheim. Method edited with an Introduction by Steven Lukes. Translated by W. D. Halls.