- Capitalism and Alternatives -


Posted by: Stoller on November 30, 1999 at 22:18:44:

In Reply to: Production. posted by borg on November 30, 1999 at 13:44:27:

[Capitalism] allows everyone an opportunity to work where and in the manner they chose or own stock.

That's like saying everyone has an opportunity to win the lottery today.

: Straw man. Man does not live by lottery alone.

And man does not acquire the means of production by propertyless labor-power alone, either.

There's college funds, inheritances, family connections...etc., etc.

Sure, SOME exceptional individuals break out of the paradigm (and their stories glut the media)---but MOST 'success stories' are born into surroundings that ENGENDER success. And BIRTH, the last I heard, IS a lottery...

: : "the social relations attached to [the dominant mode of production], in many cases, simply holds back productivity."?

: What does that mean?

That the profit motive prevents, say, AFFORDABLE HEALTH CARE (which ALL people need) while cranking out, say, illimitable PERSONAL COMPUTERS (which essentially benefits business) becuase there's more dollars to be had in making computers.

Or would you DENY that the current mode of production is not up to the task of providing basic health for people?

: The lure of riches precedes and drives the mode of production. It even follows it thru the distribution channels. The feedback from the latter results in more, less or zero production.

Say it three times if you want but that's still untrue.

Labor creates productivity. Profit simply skims some of it---and no matter what your neo-aristocratic homeboy O'Rourke says, consumer trinkets are NOT squandered 'profits' in which access to the means of production COULD have been acquired (think of how many VCRs it would take to enter Bill Gates' market)... The wealth of this country was generated by people who make NO PROFITS.

: : (Remember how Xerox sat on their computer R & D for ten years?)

: Last I heard, Xerox computers were going the way of the Edsel. So...what's the point?

Xerox prevented people from having personal computers IN THE 1970s because they were afraid that the 'paperless office' would wreck their copy sales...

: : BTW, was your title question in this post at all?

: Yea. It was in the part you snipped regarding the better than 50% of The Profits taken by the [capitalist] state from the producers without their consent , i.e. the unearned share of production.

Look, the capitalist state taxes people mainly in order to dole out countless BUSINESS SUBSIDIES and to 'protect' overseas holdings for corporations...

At least we can agree on rejecting THAT---eh?

Follow Ups:

The Debating Room Post a Followup