The Tendancy for the rate of profit to fall for dummies

[RGacky3]

How do you reconcile your adherence to Marxist economics with your advocacy of market socialism where production is carried out for profits. Though profits are shared amongst the workers equally, there would still be a tendency for it to fall.

If the profits are shared amung the workers equally thats compensation, NOT profit, although I don't advocate a for profit economy, to have a for profit economy you need capital markets, I don't agree with that.

I think market socialism, (not land, not capital, but a market for commodities), is totally doable without the profit motive (surplus value), the capitalist/labor relation and thus without the tendancy for the rate of profit to fall, along with all the other problems with capitalism.

I suppose that workers would be reluctant to sack themselves and hence the organic composition of capital would positively stablise, but would there not be economic problems as a result of the "internal contradictions of capital", in any market economy?

If you look at the internal contradictions of capital, all of them (that I can think of), come from the a market system ALONG WITH capital/labor relations, capital markets and profit (i.e. value extraction), I think a commodity market system without those things would'nt suffer from the same things.

markets have been around for a long time in different forms, even before capitalism, markets are not always the problem, somtimes they work best, sometimes they are destructive.

The fact of the matter is there has never been an attempt to introduce a society based on Classical Marxism (solely on writings of Marx and Engels), only on Leninism and Stalinism (circa 30 revolutions and countries).

It would be IMPOSSIBLE to introduce a society based on Classical Marxism, because Classical Marxism was only a criticism of capitalism, not normative economics. The only thing you have is the communist manifesto, which was a pamphlet for a political organization, nothing more, nothing less, not something modern socialists should be looking to for their normative ecnomics, (in my opinion it was'nt really that good or useful anyway.)

Marx in my opinion was useful for his positive economics, which was, in my opinion, the best, and still is the best, criticism of capitalism based on economics there is, and which still stands. For what should be the replacement I think we have better writers in modern times making suggestions.

 

[Tim Cornelis]

If the profits are shared amung the workers equally thats compensation, NOT profit, although I don't advocate a for profit economy, to have a for profit economy you need capital markets, I don't agree with that.

I think market socialism, (not land, not capital, but a market for commodities), is totally doable without the profit motive (surplus value), the capitalist/labor relation and thus without the tendancy for the rate of profit to fall, along with all the other problems with capitalism

If you look at the internal contradictions of capital, all of them (that I can think of), come from the a market system ALONG WITH capital/labor relations, capital markets and profit (i.e. value extraction), I think a commodity market system without those things would'nt suffer from the same things.

markets have been around for a long time in different forms, even before capitalism, markets are not always the problem, somtimes they work best, sometimes they are destructive.

It would be IMPOSSIBLE to introduce a society based on Classical Marxism, because Classical Marxism was only a criticism of capitalism, not normative economics. The only thing you have is the communist manifesto, which was a pamphlet for a political organization, nothing more, nothing less, not something modern socialists should be looking to for their normative ecnomics, (in my opinion it was'nt really that good or useful anyway.)

Marx in my opinion was useful for his positive economics, which was, in my opinion, the best, and still is the best, criticism of capitalism based on economics there is, and which still stands. For what should be the replacement I think we have better writers in modern times making suggestions.

Classical Marxism consists of a critique of capitalism, historical materialism, and a revolutionary strategy. The latter consists of the Critique of the Gotha Programme and the Civil War in France (the content of socialism/communism and the nature of the DOTP respectively). So it is possible.

 

[RGacky3]

Sure, I stick to DAS Kaptial 1, 2 and 3, the other writings are interesting, but not so useful for today in my humble opinion.