View Poll Results: Was Karl Marx Right About Capitalism?

Voters
94. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    38 40.43%
  • No

    56 59.57%
Page 54 of 56 FirstFirst ... 4445253545556 LastLast
Results 531 to 540 of 555

Thread: Was Karl Marx Right About Capitalism?

  1. #531
    Mixed Government advocate
    Master PO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    93,000,000 miles from Earth where its very Hot
    Last Seen
    11-30-17 @ 01:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    31,331

    Re: Was Karl Marx Right About Capitalism?

    Quote Originally Posted by earthworm View Post
    Just one example of a "lost" liberty ...
    I am against being "forced" to do anything ! I'll NEVER forget being forced to pray in some Florida school at the age of 8 ..66 years ago !
    sure i will give you a liberty under fire.

    your a rancher in west Texas, you discover oil on your property, and you wish to open your land to drilling for it, however in doing that the federal government tells you, you would hurt a lizard and sought to keep you from drilling on your own property by passing federal law.

    Could a three-inch lizard collapse the West Texas oil industry? - MRT.com: Oil

    where in the Constitution, is the government charged with lizard protection.

  2. #532
    Anti political parties
    FreedomFromAll's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    New Mexico USA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:47 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,041

    Re: Was Karl Marx Right About Capitalism?

    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    sure i will give you a liberty under fire.

    your a rancher in west Texas, you discover oil on your property, and you wish to open your land to drilling for it, however in doing that the federal government tells you, you would hurt a lizard and sought to keep you from drilling on your own property by passing federal law.

    Could a three-inch lizard collapse the West Texas oil industry? - MRT.com: Oil

    where in the Constitution, is the government charged with lizard protection.
    Congress has the power to regulate commerce. It is called the Commerce Clause. All appeals courts to have considered the question had upheld the constitutionality of the Endangered Species Act.

    Note though that I do not agree with the methods employed through Endangered Species Act. in some case they do good but in others it just makes rational minds ponder if they really thought this through. Perhaps it would be wiser to accept that a species probably isnt going to make it in the wild. And attempt resurrect the species in captivity in hopes of releasing it back in to the wild in the future. So imo a better scientific management of the Endangered Species Act should be addressed. But mismanagement does not equate unconstitutionality. It just calls for tougher regulation laws for such things.

  3. #533
    Sage
    RGacky3's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Last Seen
    08-25-15 @ 05:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    9,570

    Re: Was Karl Marx Right About Capitalism?

    Quote Originally Posted by FreedomFromAll View Post
    It is there for all to see, do you not remember our conversation thus far?

    In order for one to accept Marx's conclusions in Das Kapital one first needs to believe the tenants of the Communist manifesto. The biggest bias that Marx uses is that profiting on labor force is bad. In Marx's critique of the social standard in a capitalist economy he asserts that any profit gained by a business owner is a exploitation of the labor in which he purchased. So in Marx's view of Capitalism we end up with a paradox. Meaning that labor must be paid a natural compensation for their toil, they should gain all of the profit made from their work on the ware. But to assert such a thing would mean that the laborer was profiting off of the employer. Because the employee did not put any inverted worth in the materials or machines used to make the product they do not naturally deserve full credit for their work by gaining full price for their work and the materials and methods of production. Marx assumes that if the worker is getting anything less than the value of the workers labor plus the value of the wares that they produce that they are being exploited. The assumption or the bias rather is that the worker should take the brunt of the investments needed for the wares that are being produced and that the individual(s) owners should be eliminated as being evil exploiters of labor value. But doing so only moves the goal posts and now puts the worker in the position of being their own exploiter considering that a person agrees to do work on things that they do not actually get to keep because the need the resources that it produces for their own individual needs.
    No ... you don't need to believe the tenants of the communist manifesto ....

    Marx's "value judgements" of which there really arn't much in Kapital have nothing to do With his analysis, whether or not profiting on labor is "bad" or "good" doesn't come into it.

    This isn't a critique of Capital AT ALL.

    whether or not it's "bad" or "good" doesn't say anything about what it leads to, does it lead to self contradiction, does the Logic of capitalism work?

    Hopefully you read the above framing paragraph.

    When a person is born normally the family takes care of the childs needs up to a certain point. Usually that point is age related. At that point the young adult enters society and takes care of them self, the parents dont taking care of them. There are some exceptions of course but that is the general gist of life that it is the individuals responsibility to keep them self alive. AT that point the person is at a low in lifes accomplishments. Certain wares are needed by individuals in order to live in modern society. These things change with time. Of course some people prefer less while others prefer more. The act of obtaining those things on the individuals part is a type of profit for the individual. Add to that if the individual gets a partner and children or other dependents like family members ie siblings, elders, friends in need etc. All of these added wares need to come from somewhere. A human in terms of value actually has no value except the labor that they can do. In order to gain the extras that the individual either needs or wants he must accumulate a surplus of wares through working for them. This is called accumulated wealth. Each ware owned has a value that can be sold or traded. This accumulation is a natural law of existence. But in Das Kapital Marx labels it as a exploitation. Ah but you might say that it only applies to the Capitalist who exploits labor for profit.

    Well then lets take the self employed for example. A person who cuts firewood and sells it to their neighbor. This person does all of the labor them self. They also buy the necessary machinery to do the labor, take care of its upkeep and all. There would be zero reason for anyone to do all that work for zero gains. You must exchange wares for a profit in order to pay for the wares that you produced. that is because of the other wares that you need to sustain your own life and your dependents. Marx clearly ignores this basic concept. And he does so because of his massive bias and need to promote Communism.

    That is only one bias or assumption that Marx basis his critique on which was never considered science but just a opinion put forth to build up Communism.
    Here' Your just redifining profit, or using it in a different way than Marx is using it.

    WHen you work on Your garden are you making a profit? Well, not economically, but Your life is more pleasant ... is that Profit? It doesn't matter. Semantics don't matter.

    What about the tendancy for the rate of profit to fall?
    What about the tendancy for capitalism to cause major excesses which lead to crisis?

    And so on.

    I'm talking about analysis here, not morality, not whether profit is "wrong" or not.

  4. #534
    Anti political parties
    FreedomFromAll's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    New Mexico USA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:47 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,041

    Re: Was Karl Marx Right About Capitalism?

    Quote Originally Posted by RGacky3 View Post
    No ... you don't need to believe the tenants of the communist manifesto ....

    Marx's "value judgements" of which there really arn't much in Kapital have nothing to do With his analysis, whether or not profiting on labor is "bad" or "good" doesn't come into it.

    This isn't a critique of Capital AT ALL.

    whether or not it's "bad" or "good" doesn't say anything about what it leads to, does it lead to self contradiction, does the Logic of capitalism work?



    Here' Your just redifining profit, or using it in a different way than Marx is using it.

    WHen you work on Your garden are you making a profit? Well, not economically, but Your life is more pleasant ... is that Profit? It doesn't matter. Semantics don't matter.

    What about the tendancy for the rate of profit to fall?
    What about the tendancy for capitalism to cause major excesses which lead to crisis?

    And so on.

    I'm talking about analysis here, not morality, not whether profit is "wrong" or not.


    Morality is discussed quit a bit in Das Kapital, making it part of Das Kapital whether you accept that fact or not. Dont believe me? Well then read it for yourself.

    Surplus-Value is a moral argument. Marx even invents formulas to convince us that kids and adults working to long is immoral. The General Law of Capitalistic Accumulation is also a moral argument. "The consumption of labour power by capital is, besides, so rapid that the labourer, half-way through his life, has already more or less completely lived himself out." "Third, the demoralised and ragged, and those unable to work, chiefly people who succumb to their incapacity for adaptation, due to the division of labour; people who have passed the normal age of the labourer; the victims of industry, whose number increases with the increase of dangerous machinery, of mines, chemical works, &c., the mutilated, the sickly, the widows, &c."

    In every chapter Marx makes sure to keep the theme as a attack on Capitalism and how damn immoral it was to him. "Think of the horror!"

    So what you are asking of me is to take Das Kapital out of context and analyse just the parts that you want me too. It is very hard for me to guess what parts of Das Kapital is off limits to me to analyse (according to your judgement). Take Volume 3 Ch. 52: Classes am I too completely ignore that last chapter of Capital that Marx wrote?

    And you tell me that there isnt any relation between Das Kapital and the Communist manifesto yet we can find much of this talk in it: "Vulgar economy actually does no more than interpret, systematise and defend in doctrinaire fashion the conceptions of the agents of bourgeois production who are entrapped in bourgeois production relations." Marx makes no attempt what so ever to disbarge his promotion and Confirmation bias of Communistic philosophies. No he embraces his Confirmation bias and puts it in the forefront of every Chapter in all three volumes. The entire three volumes can be summed up as propaganda designed to convince the reader to hate Capitalism. If Marx just wrote about the ins and outs of Capitalism then your argument that I must analyse those ins and outs would make sense. But Marx didnt just do that he set out to tear down Capitalism and replace it with his own philosophies on and how social change will destroy the Capitalists.


    And well tendencies are subjective. Das kapital only asserts tendencies and what ifs. Marx predicts an outcome and like all good prophets leaves enough vagueness for some people to point fingers and see evidence. The question vexed in this thread is if Marx was right about Capitalism. The answer is yes or no depending if you buy into Marx's philosophies. I dont buy into his beliefs, so no, he was wrong. mind you that I only count what Marx actually gets credit for not what he observed in his own time. He doesnt get credit for being a historian, observations that he makes in Das Kapital were also independently observed by many others of his time. So unregulated Capitalism was known by most people to most likely take a turn for the worse sooner than later. The US Constitution was written in a way that recognized that unregulated Capitalism must be avoided. The denial of allowing nobility is one case of that.

  5. #535
    Sage
    RGacky3's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Last Seen
    08-25-15 @ 05:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    9,570

    Re: Was Karl Marx Right About Capitalism?

    Quote Originally Posted by FreedomFromAll View Post
    Morality is discussed quit a bit in Das Kapital, making it part of Das Kapital whether you accept that fact or not. Dont believe me? Well then read it for yourself.

    Surplus-Value is a moral argument. Marx even invents formulas to convince us that kids and adults working to long is immoral. The General Law of Capitalistic Accumulation is also a moral argument. "The consumption of labour power by capital is, besides, so rapid that the labourer, half-way through his life, has already more or less completely lived himself out." "Third, the demoralised and ragged, and those unable to work, chiefly people who succumb to their incapacity for adaptation, due to the division of labour; people who have passed the normal age of the labourer; the victims of industry, whose number increases with the increase of dangerous machinery, of mines, chemical works, &c., the mutilated, the sickly, the widows, &c."

    In every chapter Marx makes sure to keep the theme as a attack on Capitalism and how damn immoral it was to him. "Think of the horror!"

    So what you are asking of me is to take Das Kapital out of context and analyse just the parts that you want me too. It is very hard for me to guess what parts of Das Kapital is off limits to me to analyse (according to your judgement). Take Volume 3 Ch. 52: Classes am I too completely ignore that last chapter of Capital that Marx wrote?

    And you tell me that there isnt any relation between Das Kapital and the Communist manifesto yet we can find much of this talk in it: "Vulgar economy actually does no more than interpret, systematise and defend in doctrinaire fashion the conceptions of the agents of bourgeois production who are entrapped in bourgeois production relations." Marx makes no attempt what so ever to disbarge his promotion and Confirmation bias of Communistic philosophies. No he embraces his Confirmation bias and puts it in the forefront of every Chapter in all three volumes. The entire three volumes can be summed up as propaganda designed to convince the reader to hate Capitalism. If Marx just wrote about the ins and outs of Capitalism then your argument that I must analyse those ins and outs would make sense. But Marx didnt just do that he set out to tear down Capitalism and replace it with his own philosophies on and how social change will destroy the Capitalists.


    And well tendencies are subjective. Das kapital only asserts tendencies and what ifs. Marx predicts an outcome and like all good prophets leaves enough vagueness for some people to point fingers and see evidence. The question vexed in this thread is if Marx was right about Capitalism. The answer is yes or no depending if you buy into Marx's philosophies. I dont buy into his beliefs, so no, he was wrong. mind you that I only count what Marx actually gets credit for not what he observed in his own time. He doesnt get credit for being a historian, observations that he makes in Das Kapital were also independently observed by many others of his time. So unregulated Capitalism was known by most people to most likely take a turn for the worse sooner than later. The US Constitution was written in a way that recognized that unregulated Capitalism must be avoided. The denial of allowing nobility is one case of that.
    No, surplus value is not a moral argument.

    The quote you made isn't a moral argument it's a matter of fact about urban life in the 1800s.

    I'm asking you to actually take the analysis and critique that .... Can you do that or not?

  6. #536
    Anti political parties
    FreedomFromAll's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    New Mexico USA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:47 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,041

    Re: Was Karl Marx Right About Capitalism?

    Quote Originally Posted by RGacky3 View Post
    No, surplus value is not a moral argument.

    The quote you made isn't a moral argument it's a matter of fact about urban life in the 1800s.

    I'm asking you to actually take the analysis and critique that .... Can you do that or not?
    BINGO! give that man a cigar!

    Indeed Karl Marx was talking about the 1800's. In context the only predictions that Karl Marx made was that if European Capitalism spread through out the entire planet. And in Das Kapital Marx proclaimed that Capitalism has already ran its course in the US. Marx asserted that freedom and liberty was non existent for the workers in the US and said so in Das Kapital. When people ask if Karl Marx was right about Capitalism the question is directed at just Das Kapital it is directed at the assertions mainly espoused in the Communist Manifesto. That is if Capitalism has ran its course and if its time for Socialism to replace it. Which is why insist that analyzing Karl Marx's predictions about Capitalism cannot be limited to Das Kapital.

    "SO

    Was Karl Marx right about capitalism?" That is the question posed for us in this thread. It was not limited to just Das Kapital. There isnt any rule in this debate that forbids me from looking at the entire scope of Marx's critique of Capitalism. Your artificial limitations in this debate are self serving and quite frankly will be ignored as being irrelevant manipulations of the topic at hand.

    But the question is vexed: What is Marx right about when it comes to his criticisms on Capitalism? Marx's critique covers economical, sociological/psychological and ethical critiques of Capitalism. But he never divorces any of those concepts, in fact he relies on the sociological/psychological and ethical concepts to explain the economical implications. It boils down to Marx asserting that profiting and having people being paid to work for you is unethical. That is what he basis his critique of Capitalism on. Marx does in Das Kapital go to lengths trying to explain the nuts and bolts of Capitalism but not without a mega dose of bias. Capitalism tends to this and that in the 1800's and it does the same now at least where we let it happen.

  7. #537
    Sage
    RGacky3's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Last Seen
    08-25-15 @ 05:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    9,570

    Re: Was Karl Marx Right About Capitalism?

    Quote Originally Posted by FreedomFromAll View Post
    BINGO! give that man a cigar!

    Indeed Karl Marx was talking about the 1800's. In context the only predictions that Karl Marx made was that if European Capitalism spread through out the entire planet. And in Das Kapital Marx proclaimed that Capitalism has already ran its course in the US. Marx asserted that freedom and liberty was non existent for the workers in the US and said so in Das Kapital. When people ask if Karl Marx was right about Capitalism the question is directed at just Das Kapital it is directed at the assertions mainly espoused in the Communist Manifesto. That is if Capitalism has ran its course and if its time for Socialism to replace it. Which is why insist that analyzing Karl Marx's predictions about Capitalism cannot be limited to Das Kapital.

    "SO

    Was Karl Marx right about capitalism?" That is the question posed for us in this thread. It was not limited to just Das Kapital. There isnt any rule in this debate that forbids me from looking at the entire scope of Marx's critique of Capitalism. Your artificial limitations in this debate are self serving and quite frankly will be ignored as being irrelevant manipulations of the topic at hand.

    But the question is vexed: What is Marx right about when it comes to his criticisms on Capitalism? Marx's critique covers economical, sociological/psychological and ethical critiques of Capitalism. But he never divorces any of those concepts, in fact he relies on the sociological/psychological and ethical concepts to explain the economical implications. It boils down to Marx asserting that profiting and having people being paid to work for you is unethical. That is what he basis his critique of Capitalism on. Marx does in Das Kapital go to lengths trying to explain the nuts and bolts of Capitalism but not without a mega dose of bias. Capitalism tends to this and that in the 1800's and it does the same now at least where we let it happen.
    Oh boy, you're never gonna really get to it are you.

    Was Marx right about the internal contradictions of capitalism?

    Whether profiting is or is not moral is besides the point, even if it is, Marx says that Capitalism has internal contradictions that make it collapse and lead it into constant crisis.

  8. #538
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Last Seen
    08-18-15 @ 09:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,974

    Re: Was Karl Marx Right About Capitalism?

    Quote Originally Posted by FreedomFromAll View Post
    You are assuming that all of the good places in Malls are leased to old companies. Malls are trendy places and property managers want clients that bring in the most people. Hell most malls around today are from the 80's at the oldest ,if they still exist and havent been completely replaced. More probable is that most malls are form the 90's and newer. I am pretty sure that "black folks" were in the game then.
    I don't think you understand. The person in charge of leasing was telling me about the spots that they have. That mall has been around for a while. They have some very exclusive stores in there. First of all the lady was telling me how much they rent the space for in the places they have reserved for exclusive clients. It was way more than I could afford, and neither was I trying to get such a space because I knew it was out of my range. But what I didn't know is that they would not rent to you, even if you had that kind of money. You have to be a name like Chanel, Armani, etc. Otherwise they just won't rent to you. Back when Coco Chanel was establishing herself, black people were not in that game.

  9. #539
    Anti political parties
    FreedomFromAll's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    New Mexico USA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:47 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,041

    Re: Was Karl Marx Right About Capitalism?

    Quote Originally Posted by MildSteel View Post
    I don't think you understand. The person in charge of leasing was telling me about the spots that they have. That mall has been around for a while. They have some very exclusive stores in there. First of all the lady was telling me how much they rent the space for in the places they have reserved for exclusive clients. It was way more than I could afford, and neither was I trying to get such a space because I knew it was out of my range. But what I didn't know is that they would not rent to you, even if you had that kind of money. You have to be a name like Chanel, Armani, etc. Otherwise they just won't rent to you. Back when Coco Chanel was establishing herself, black people were not in that game.
    People go to malls to buy trendy crap. Part of that lease agreement is to fulfill that land managements obligations to provide that trendy crap. The key is the business model of the mall. If that business model is for a thme like 'buy local no name brands' then your money would be welcomed.

  10. #540
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Last Seen
    08-18-15 @ 09:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,974

    Re: Was Karl Marx Right About Capitalism?

    Quote Originally Posted by FreedomFromAll View Post
    People go to malls to buy trendy crap. Part of that lease agreement is to fulfill that land managements obligations to provide that trendy crap. The key is the business model of the mall. If that business model is for a thme like 'buy local no name brands' then your money would be welcomed.
    You don't know anything about malls. I have done it. I know how they operate. There was space there I could have rented, it's just that the space was no good.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •