Karl Marx: I told you so!
C.M. Burns @ Fri Oct 10, 2008 6:17 am
$1:
... Marx argued that capitalism was prone to periodic crises. He suggested that over time, capitalists would invest more and more in new technologies, and less and less in labor. Since Marx believed that surplus value appropriated from labor is the source of profits, he concluded that the rate of profit would fall even as the economy grew. When the rate of profit falls below a certain point, the result would be a recession or depression in which certain sectors of the economy would collapse. Marx thought that during such a crisis the price of labor would also fall, and eventually make possible the investment in new technologies and the growth of new sectors of the economy.
Marx believed that this cycle of growth, collapse, and growth would be punctuated by increasingly severe crises. Moreover, he believed that the long-term consequence of this process was necessarily the enrichment and empowerment of the capitalist class and the impoverishment of the proletariat.
SourceMarx believed that this cycle of growth, collapse, and growth would be punctuated by increasingly severe crises. Moreover, he believed that the long-term consequence of this process was necessarily the enrichment and empowerment of the capitalist class and the impoverishment of the proletariat.
[To the possessor of money capital] “the process of production appears merely as an unavoidable intermediate link, as a necessary evil for the sake of money-making. All nations with a capitalist mode of production are therefore seized periodically by a feverish attempt to make money without the intervention of the process of production.”
—Karl Marx, Capital, Volume II, “The Circuit of Money Capital”
C.M. Burns @ Fri Oct 10, 2008 6:23 am
In seeking new ways of making money without the intervention of the process of production, banksters and financial predators invented derivatives. As Capitalism requires constant, cancerous growth, these predators sought new supplies of their feedstock, money. They tried to get G.W. Bush to take the Social Security fund and invest it in the market. What a disaster that would have been had that happened!
In Canada, the CONservatives were successful in their attempt to supply the predators with OUR money. They created an investment board that invests our EI surplus in the market.
Don't you get it? The cycle of collapse is never going to end as long as we live with a capitalist economy. How long are you going to put up with this shit!
OPP @ Fri Oct 10, 2008 6:30 am
Socialismo o muerte!!!
faile @ Fri Oct 10, 2008 7:22 am
C.M. Burns C.M. Burns:
Don't you get it? The cycle of collapse is never going to end as long as we live with a capitalist economy. How long are you going to put up with this shit!
For as long as I value freedom over some socialist's idea of 'fairness'
For as long as I value long term prosperity with cycles of correction over perpetual mediocrity.
In other words...FOREVER.
robmik43 @ Fri Oct 10, 2008 7:28 am
Karlo wasn't my favourite Marx.
I preferred Groucho, Harpo, Chico, and even Zeppo.
Socialism has never worked, anywhere.
As faile indicates, cycles of correction do take place,
but long term prosperity only comes from capitalism.
martin14 @ Fri Oct 10, 2008 7:30 am
no, Burns is right.. lets put the workers in charge of the factories,
and the bank tellers in charge of the banks, and lets all watch
what will happen then 
mixedfarmer @ Fri Oct 10, 2008 8:01 am
complete capialism would be like the road warrior movies and on the other hand communizm is like the borg
OPP @ Fri Oct 10, 2008 8:04 am
martin14 martin14:
no, Burns is right.. lets put the workers in charge of the factories,
and the bank tellers in charge of the banks, and lets all watch
what will happen then
and the bank tellers in charge of the banks, and lets all watch
what will happen then
Workers take over factories
What was that again about workers taking over factories?
Reverend Blair @ Fri Oct 10, 2008 8:05 am
Huh, markets are in the toilet again this morning.
OPP @ Fri Oct 10, 2008 8:07 am
faile faile:
C.M. Burns C.M. Burns:
Don't you get it? The cycle of collapse is never going to end as long as we live with a capitalist economy. How long are you going to put up with this shit!
For as long as I value freedom over some socialist's idea of 'fairness'
For as long as I value long term prosperity with cycles of correction over perpetual mediocrity.
In other words...FOREVER.
Freedom? Whos freedom? The freedom for the elite to do as they please? Your freedom? Do you have freedom now? Would you not have freedom in a socialist society?
faile @ Fri Oct 10, 2008 8:37 am
OPP OPP:
faile faile:
C.M. Burns C.M. Burns:
Don't you get it? The cycle of collapse is never going to end as long as we live with a capitalist economy. How long are you going to put up with this shit!
For as long as I value freedom over some socialist's idea of 'fairness'
For as long as I value long term prosperity with cycles of correction over perpetual mediocrity.
In other words...FOREVER.
Freedom? Whos freedom? The freedom for the elite to do as they please? Your freedom? Do you have freedom now? Would you not have freedom in a socialist society?
The freedom of myself or anyone else to pursue my own interests and profit from them. Granted, in capitalism you end up with large corporations whose industries fall out of favor and they are unable to sustain employment for everyone, or even a livable income. The thing you have to realize is that the market chose those corporations to be the big ones, because at one time they were doing something right. In socialism when an industry falls out of favor, everyone else has to sustain it. Society doesn't move on and produce new, productive jobs because that requires passionate people looking for what the 'next big thing' is. Without the freedom to profit from doing the groundwork of finding the 'next big thing' much of the motivation to start new businesses disappears. New business is how the market adjusts to changing times and where jobs come from. Governments cannot and do not create jobs by reallocating resources from the private sector.
P.S. If you want to learn more about communist regimes and freedom, try looking up how many people communist regimes have slaughtered sometime. http://www.paulbogdanor.com/left.html
Toro @ Fri Oct 10, 2008 9:09 am
C.M. Burns C.M. Burns:
$1:
... Marx argued that capitalism was prone to periodic crises. He suggested that over time, capitalists would invest more and more in new technologies, and less and less in labor. Since Marx believed that surplus value appropriated from labor is the source of profits, he concluded that the rate of profit would fall even as the economy grew. When the rate of profit falls below a certain point, the result would be a recession or depression in which certain sectors of the economy would collapse. Marx thought that during such a crisis the price of labor would also fall, and eventually make possible the investment in new technologies and the growth of new sectors of the economy.
Marx believed that this cycle of growth, collapse, and growth would be punctuated by increasingly severe crises. Moreover, he believed that the long-term consequence of this process was necessarily the enrichment and empowerment of the capitalist class and the impoverishment of the proletariat.
SourceMarx believed that this cycle of growth, collapse, and growth would be punctuated by increasingly severe crises. Moreover, he believed that the long-term consequence of this process was necessarily the enrichment and empowerment of the capitalist class and the impoverishment of the proletariat.
[To the possessor of money capital] “the process of production appears merely as an unavoidable intermediate link, as a necessary evil for the sake of money-making. All nations with a capitalist mode of production are therefore seized periodically by a feverish attempt to make money without the intervention of the process of production.”
—Karl Marx, Capital, Volume II, “The Circuit of Money Capital”
Thanks for posting discredited economic theory, as history has borne out Marx to be wrong, at least as highlighted in red. Profits are at their peak at the height of a boom. There is no evidence that profits fall as growth continues, at least not when the economy is dangerously close to melting down. What happens is that at the top of the cycle, when profit margins are at highs, investors often assume that the rates of return are constant at those levels, and thus increase their investments. Increased investments increases the productive capacity, which drives down returns, and often leads to excess capacity. At that point, the returns on capital fall below the costs of capital, and capacity is taken out, which causes a rise in unemployment.
Toro @ Fri Oct 10, 2008 9:21 am
C.M. Burns C.M. Burns:
In seeking new ways of making money without the intervention of the process of production, banksters and financial predators invented derivatives. As Capitalism requires constant, cancerous growth, these predators sought new supplies of their feedstock, money. They tried to get G.W. Bush to take the Social Security fund and invest it in the market. What a disaster that would have been had that happened!
In Canada, the CONservatives were successful in their attempt to supply the predators with OUR money. They created an investment board that invests our EI surplus in the market.
Don't you get it? The cycle of collapse is never going to end as long as we live with a capitalist economy. How long are you going to put up with this shit!
In Canada, the CONservatives were successful in their attempt to supply the predators with OUR money. They created an investment board that invests our EI surplus in the market.
Don't you get it? The cycle of collapse is never going to end as long as we live with a capitalist economy. How long are you going to put up with this shit!
Wow, this has to be one of your most clueless posts yet Burns.
Let me clue you in ... Canada invests not just EI but the CPP in stocks. This is one of the most intelligent decisions Canada has made to secure its long-term financial health. Canada has an enormous future healthcare and pension liabilities. I've shown you the inexorable mathematical logic of the healthcare problem - which I recall you saying was "boring." Canada also has an enormous pension liability. Investing in stocks reduces the gap between what Canadians will owe and what Canadians will pay in the future, and puts Canada several steps ahead of America in solving this huge problem that is coming.
I know you're not all that down with math, but let me explain it to you. Over time, stocks have returned about 10% per year. Its not continuous, but that is the average return to equities since about 1870. Bonds have returned 6% while cash has returned 4%. Pensions have very long time horizons. Investing $1 million in stocks compounds to $116 million years over five decades. Compounded in bonds, after 50 years, $1 million becomes $17 million. In cash, it becomes $6 million.
So what you are telling us is that it is much wiser to not invest in stocks, even though over 50 years, investing $1 million in stocks will yield $100 million more than investing in bonds. Good job.
BartSimpson @ Fri Oct 10, 2008 10:14 am
OPP OPP:
Socialismo o muerte!!!
I'd be happy to satisfy your request.
C.M. Burns @ Fri Oct 10, 2008 2:40 pm
Toro Toro:
Wow, this has to be one of your most clueless posts yet Burns.
I guess that means I've hit a nerve!
Toro Toro:
I know you're not all that down with math, but let me explain it to you.
I guess you're not down with the facts:
Today's headlines:
$1:
At the open, the Dow Jones plummeted more than 8%, falling below the 8,000 mark for the first time since April 2003.
Wiping out FIVE YEARS of GAINS.
$1:
Canada's TSX Composite index fell more than 500 points to a session low of 9034.
$1:
The FTSE has fallen 1047.9 points this week, the biggest ever fall.
In percentage terms the decline is 21pc , the most since the 28.2pc fall in the week of Black Monday in 1987.
In percentage terms the decline is 21pc , the most since the 28.2pc fall in the week of Black Monday in 1987.
$1:
Overall, the S&P/TSX composite index has fallen 34 per cent this year, but that still puts it among the best performers in the world, if that means anything. By comparison, Germany's benchmark index has fallen nearly 44 per cent, and Japan's Nikkei 225 has fallen 47 per cent.
Is that the math I should be down with?
