: Marxists have never denied the capita;lism is amazing, nor that it is progressive, simply that in teh end, it does a lot of harm as well.
Strange, to admit the amazing qualities of liberty and property, then seek to inhibit it.
: Capitalism doesn't collapse, but if we look at '68 or '73 (the big one) its crises did a lot of harm to workers across teh board, and as it becomes less profitable to invest in production, more and more money goes into zero-sum economics, like buying shares...
This focusses capital where it produces the most wealth. If it 'made money' out of nothing inflation would be several hundred %. The money made reflects the underlying value (ie the value placed upon it by consumers) of the company (although it can be haphazard, its a good guide over time).
: Yes, but it doesn't free us enough, once we have socialism, we wwill have total freedom of usage of resources.
Unless enough people dont want you to use what they have made with those resources.
: In terms of most goods, it does, most markets (production that is) end up saturated. We could even have a three day weeek, but then we'd never have enough wages to live on. Effective abundance is possible.
Hence capitalism goes on.
: Ignoring the 30's, '68, '73, the ongoing rate of two million unemployed in Britain, etc. the downward slope to stagnancy approaches.
No useful data proves this, or even shows it in any way we can be confident of. The data that does exist suggests the opposite, an upward trend punctuated by setbacks.