I'm exploring the concepts of productive vs unproductive labor and its relationship to what they're calling the 'Smart Economy' or 'New Economy'- growth in industries like Information Technology, Education, Health Care, Distribution & Retail, Transit, 'smart manufacturing', R&D, FIRE sector, etc.
I think we're all in agreement to start with that regardless of whether or not a person is employed in productive labor (direct production of surplus value at the point of production) they are still proletarian:
"...with the growth of capitalist production all services become transformed into wage-labour, and those who perform them into wage-labourers..." Marx, Results of the Immediate Process of Production
An argument by one of the accompanying texts on the Marxists Internet Archive tries to make the connection that workers in service are simply a continuance of the value production process- in that the service to commodities is implied at purchase and just an extension of the production process.
"If you buy a car, that’s a good; but if you lease the same car, that’s a service. The line between “hire purchase” and leasing is hard to draw. It may be that additional labour (regular servicing for example) is combined with the manufacture of the car by socialising labour which would have been carried out by the owner themselves, but hire remains simply a means of effecting a sale.
Socialisation of labour may involve replacing activity formerly carried out outside the market with manufacture, but then later the manufactured labour is incorporated into a “service”. For example, during the second half of the 20th century, cooking in the domestic environment was largely replaced by manufacture of food products, and increasingly take-away, fast food and the restaurant trade – services – supplant the sale of prepared food. Thus manufacture and service here mark stages in the process of socialisation of labour.
The growth of what is called the service sector sometimes takes place through the break-up of enterprises, with separate firms, which would previously have been divisions of the same enterprise, instead of simply collaborating with each other, selling their services to each other. For example, clerks doing the salaries in a manufacturing company, may find themselves as employees of a firm selling salary services to the manufacturer. Exactly the same work, first manufacture, now a service. In the case of labour hire firms, workers doing good old fashioned factory work are magically transformed into employees in the service sector!"
Is the distinction between productive capital and circulating capital part of this discussion?
Is it necessary for Marxists to have a better understanding of the exploitation process in jobs (which are now a majority of the national economies of the central capitalist nations) which are not directly producing value?