[ home / rules / faq ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / siberia / hobby / tech / edu / games / anime / music / draw / AKM ] [ meta / roulette ] [ cytube / git ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru ]

/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

"The anons of the past have only shitposted on the Internets about the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it."
Name
Email
Subject
Comment
Flag
File
Embed
Password (For file deletion.)

Join our Matrix Chat <=> IRC: #leftypol on Rizon
Please give feedback on proposals, new on Mondays : /meta/
New /roulette/ topic: /spoox/ - Paranormal, horror and the occult.
New board: /AKM/ - Guns, weapons and the art of war.


File: 1642218707874.png (263.94 KB, 600x300, ClipboardImage.png)

 No.691976

If the circulation of capital can no longer allow that capitalists can produce profits then that ensures that capital cannot converge to money hoarders and that capitalists can only ever produce as much as they spend.
How does that actually do anything to kill the capitalist mode of production directly is my question.

After all private property still exists when the rate of profit as at 0 and the possibility of forced increased production of capital through the production of and forced consumption of commodities to have their use and exchange values is all too real…

 No.692003

>>691976
I think the economy would just stagnate as goods pile up and workers can't buy the stuff without taking on more and more debt, leaving the capitalists with no way out other than to withdraw demand by raising interest rates to induce a recession (destroy "zombie" businesses), or resort to fascism and war.

>11:33

 No.692005

>>692003
Oops wrong video but that one's good too.

 No.692008

>>692003
Personally I just think when conventional production methods can’t yield more profits capitalists turn to the capitalist mode of consumption or “consumer capitalism” to endlessly just print excuses to keep the factories and mines manufacturing whatever they want and hence pretty much artificially grow the economy with endless overpriced commodities like what NYC does with overproducing apartments no one in the city can afford to pay to live in

 No.692011

>>692008
We’ll more like most can’t afford to live in
A middle class family by American stats needs to have an income of a bare minimum of 2 million to live in downtown Manhattan

 No.692022

It's not that capitalism automatically ceases to exist, but it'd result in, for example, increased concentration of capital and decreased wages. Eventually normal living would become unsustainable for too many people.

 No.692028

>>692022
So your stating capitalism dies when it grows into a security threat for a state to the point where socialist policy becomes better for maintaining the 2 national interests every state in earth possesses as a byproduct of the fact that when the production of capital stops capital circulates towards money hoarders causing decline in economic development and security

Economic development and public safety?

 No.692031

>>692028
>>692022
Sorry I’m gonna rewrite my reply

Capitalism dies when it grows into a threat for economic development and public security due to capital production ceasing?

 No.692085

It doesn't. People pushing that stupid meme are superimposing a quasi-Malthusian argument to change entirely Marx's original point. The point in Marx is that TRPF isn't just a long-term doom trend, but that it means capitalism is a grossly inadequate arrangement with periodic crises, and that capitalists wind up doing very unproductive things to restore profitability. In theory the system can engage in cyclical destruction, and this was even advanced as a solution. The true solution, though, was to change ruling class economic thinking to an arrangement where contraction of the economy was desirable and a good thing, and to manage the fall so that the "correct" people are disposed of in planned crises.

Anyway, economic growth really only exists on paper. It's not a natural, organic thing that always corresponds to the production of something useful.

 No.692108

>>691976
Can't have parasites at the top when they don't get anything out of their ownership - i.e. zero rate of profit.You are most likely mixing up feudalism's and capitalism's traits, that's where your confusion stems from. Feudalism had producers/workers who paid heavy taxes to owners, while capitalism has owners who use workers as tools. If the costs of tools becomes equal to prices of goods, there's nothing this owner gains from this, thus no basis for a capitalist society.

 No.692110

>>692085
>Recognizing that the TRPF isn’t a countdown clock but an asymptote that reveals capitalism inherent instability and longterm inviability
Heartbreaking: the worst person you know made a great point

 No.692212

>>692110
He is hardly the worst.

 No.692224

>>692085
I would add, that with the advent of monopoly capitalism, hoping that a drop to 0 in the ROP would result in Socialism(however misguided that idea was from the beginning), has eventually become a distant fantasy

 No.692225

>>691976
This is the death-knell of capitalism because the driving force, profit, of capitalism is gone, but it's gone in the worst of ways, because profit is only generated as a surplus, which means that either workers are being paid what they truly produce, or that there is no more work to be done, and therefore no one to buy the products. What is the point of doing any production for exchange?
In effect, one can thing of the tendency of the rate of profit to fall as the economic equivalent of entropy. At some point, the entire capitalist system would still die of this, but by then it may be too late. This is why we if socialism is to succeed, the proletariat must take control of the means of production before they are entirely made powerless by the bourgeoisie. That being said, even if the bourgeoisie managed to kill off all the proletariat, they would also by default eliminate all class divides. Communism is inevitable. The only thing that matters is if the proletariat at large will be the ones to transition into this state, or if it will be a utopia reserved for the ultra-rich of our time.

 No.692238

>>692225
>Communism is inevitable
No it isn't. Be real with yourself

 No.692242

>>692238
I mean that either the wealthy will have it exclusively after they kill off the rest of us, or we will all share in it. There is no way to keep capitalism going in perpetuity.

 No.692248

>>692238
Communism or barbarism is inevitable.

 No.692249

capitalism is more than a line on a graph

 No.692253

>>692242
people that talk like this have 0 idea what the fuck they're talking about. literally anyone with brain cells to rub together knows "the rich" need "us" to be wealthy

 No.692254

>>692005
masterpiece

 No.692306


 No.692309

I kinda always thought 0 profit doesn’t kill capitalism, but kills its raison d'etre.

 No.692323

File: 1642251928753.png (1.95 MB, 1400x1210, ClipboardImage.png)

And what is it to prevent the scenario where tech amplifies the same psychological manipulations that drive consumerism today? Maybe not forever, but past the critical point of reduced scarcity, or resource crisis or any other breaking points along the asymptote of the rate of profit, letting capitalism come out on top of the other side of those crises? It may be something else entirely, the structures of power and the means to hold it may be changed but…

What if it's not socialism, and we are stuck longer term, with whatever it is that capitalism evolves into?

 No.692458

The rate of profit will never actually hit 0 due to selection, but society at large can actually start hitting negative overall wealth accumulation due to losses involved which will ONLY be realized when society measures its flow of material through other means, ie. waste begins to outpace production. 2020 might have actually already seen this start to happen, with the beginning of the mass implosion of zombie businesses and evictions.

 No.692464

>>692458
>The rate of profit will never actually hit 0 due to selection,
to clarify what i wrote here: Companies can drop below 0 profit rate but will be removed from the aggregate (ie, bankruptcy and dissolution). This will increase the profit rate but can cause a net decrease in the amount of trade and wealth available because those businesses might still be providing useful products and services but simply unable to do it at a profit.

 No.692909

Industrial capital is the increase of stuff from an initial amount of stuff by investing into the production process. What happens when you can no longer increase the amount of stuff you have by doing this? You don't have the capitalist mode of production anymore. But of course, if you still live in a market-based competition-driven society that relies on growth to beat others at their own game, then you will find yourself pushed into the other two kinds of capital. Industrial capitalists have found themselves transformed into merchant capitalists and finance capitalists over the last several decades as the profitability from the capitalist mode of production is no longer enough to satiate shareholders.

 No.692992

>>692909
You have to also consider the lack of investment in better production methods of industrial machinery that’s making the costs of constant capital thousands of times higher than with handicraft
Don’t forget a big factor behind the decline in the rate of profit has to do with a market having more and more investment towards constant capital for the sake of revenue until the assets become to costly to raise profit margins

Unless of course innovation or increased industrialization occurs to diminish costs through public spending…

 No.692995

>>692992
Not to mention profits reproducing can be utilized to diminish said costs through turning profits into variable capital rather than to say resort to simple money hoarding

 No.693034

>>692323
>And what is it to prevent the scenario where tech amplifies
You have to take into account diminishing returns, which makes technology for controlling people not worth it. Look at what has happened in the last decade where capitalism has invested more into technology for control than in technology for better means of production, there has been a huge decline. At a fundamental level, mechanisms for control are unproductive, and a societal model geared towards control just won't be able to compete against a more productivity focused society. You are not painting a picture of capitalists being able to lock in their status, you are describing capitalists destroying societies in the attempt.

>What if it's not socialism

Marx was correct with his prediction that socialism is the successor model to capitalism. Look ahead, look at the types of crisis we are going to face, those will be mastered by socialist societies, capitalist societies will either become more similar to socialist societies or they fall by the wayside.

 No.693079

>>691976
It's called a "credit crunch".

 No.693866

You occasionally read news that there are people out there who hold slaves in their cellars. Sometimes they act alone, often their family goes along with it. They don't necessarily make a profit that way, but they hold on to their slaves. Your family only needn to breed your slaves and this can go on and on. Same thing with capitalism at zero net profit and the working class.


Unique IPs: 23

[Return][Go to top] [Catalog] | [Home][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ home / rules / faq ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / siberia / hobby / tech / edu / games / anime / music / draw / AKM ] [ meta / roulette ] [ cytube / git ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru ]