Hi all,

I’m seeing a lot of hate for capitalism here, and I’m wondering why that is and what the rationale behind it is. I’m pretty pro-capitalism myself, so I want to see the logic on the other side of the fence.

If this isn’t the right forum for a political/economic discussion-- I’m happy to take this somewhere else.

Cheers!

  • J Lou@mastodon.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    The system I am describing has full private ownership. I am not taking the socialist position of collectivizing the means of production. Capital can be privately owned including by individuals. For example, an individual could own a factory and rent it out to a worker coop.

    Key inputs would have more value. That does not amount to more fruits of labor because by fruits of labor, I mean the literal property rights to the production output and the liabilities for the used-up inputs not the value

    • GoodEye8@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Then it’s not a non-capitalist economy.

      Capital can be privately owned including by individuals. For example, an individual could own a factory and rent it out to a worker coop.

      Your example is literally capitalism. You use your capital and extract surplus value from the worker coop in the form of “rent”.

      • J Lou@mastodon.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        The anti-capitalist tradition I am speaking from is descended from Proudhon and other classical laborists not Marx. I reject the labor theory of value.

        The difference from capitalism is that legal system recognizes the employer-employee contract as invalid, and thus all businesses are required to be worker coops. I am fine with calling it capitalism if necessary, but many defenders of capitalism would not consider it to be so

          • J Lou@mastodon.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Marginal productivity theory is a better analysis. I don’t approve of the ideological way economists present it though.

            There is a need for a labor theory to recognize flaws in capitalism, but the labor theory that is needed is one of property (LTP) not of value after all capitalism is a property system. LTV is insufficiently decisive in its critique. At best, it says that workers are underpaid. LTP, on the other hand, demonstrates that workers legally own 0% of what they produce