I don't think it's a tautology. An individual capitalist may gain by setting up a Ponzi scheme, which doesn't help capitalsim as a whole. In fact, it hurts it.
>Well, of course it does, but so what? Because something benefits
capitalists does not make it part of an evil plan. Far more use-value
is produced than "surplus value" - has to be. <
the idea of the world being run by "evil plans" should be rejected, though sometimes evil plans occur (e.g., Iran-Contra). Capitalism is a social structures that generates dynamics (accumulation, etc.) that may or may not reproduce capitalism over time.
(I don't know how one can say that more use-value is produced than surplus-value, since the former can't be measured. The latter can, but only in theory or as a first approximation.)
>Capitalists tend the garden of the financial/ownership system and a
culture which produces hierarchy as a norm, people tend the garden of
the economy. <
hmm?
>What we in fact see is Bush expanding the government and government
payrolls as fast as they've ever been expanded. We should expect this
because hosing down the economy with new money promotes growth. So
long as the growth of government doesn't undermine the capitalist
class politically, what do they care? All the merrier to print money
and have a good time. So long as it doesn't inflate away the returns
of bondholders, it's all gravy. <
clearly, Bush and his people see it as beneficial. Whether its good for capitalism as a system or not will be seen.
>It should be clear to all by now that the argument about the size of
government was a canard. Big gov, small gov, it's all financed by
bondholders anyway. <
I agree, but it's only government deficits that are financed that way.
>The chimerical magic of the invisible flow of "surplus value" is a
distraction. Who owns the capital. Whom do you have to go to to get
anything started? Those people clearly have the power to set terms and
over the long haul they will benefit because there is no alternative
source of capital. <
the understanding of surplus-value is supposed to help us understand these kinds of issues.
>Not only can government money be used to pay workers who don't
produce surplus value, capitalist money can be used to pay workers who
don't create any value. The search for surplus value in every hour of
labor is pointless. Not every player at a casino has to lose for the
casino to win - they have house odds. <
individual capitalists (and the government) often hire labor that promotes individual profits -- but doesn't promote surplus-value production.
>Forget "surplus value" exchange value is all you can put in the bank. <
so all theory that goes beyond the realm of appearances is out?
-- Jim Devine
"The price one pays for pursuing any profession or calling is an intimate knowledge of its ugly side." -- James Baldwin
This email was cleaned by emailStripper, available for free from http://www.papercut.biz/emailStripper.htm