Desire & Scarcity (was Re: Desire under the Elms)

[Max Sawicky]

CB: Are you really saying that there is a in U.S. economy/society a scarcity
, such that every last person could not be guaranteed food, shelter,
clothing, transportation and many more basic use-values ?
>>>>>

mbs: No, but once having obtained 'basic use-values,'
everyone would want more.


>>>>>>>>>>>

  If you took three-quarters of the wealth of approximately the wealthiest
10% ( leaving them all still wealthy) and redistributed it to the poorest
10%, scarcity of all fundamental use-values would be eradicated, no ?  What
you are saying seems implausible.
>>>>>>>>>>

The wealth represents the capital stock.  If you
redistributed ownership [emphasis added:] *for
the purpose of immediate consumption*, total
productive capacity would fall radically.

Wealth is not some mountain of consumables.
It could be translated into same, but at
the considerable cost of reduced consumption
afterwards.

The capitalist consumption/conspicuous
consumption component of output is trivial
in comparison to unmet needs of the masses.
So redistributing it doesn't get you very
far.

The real problem is under-production of
'basic use-values.'  If capitalism falls,
that will be the reason.

mbs