4 ms·

Socialists will attribute any societal problem to capitalism. Of course, capitalist critics online will never mention that capitalism drives down labor demand b

Socialists will attribute any societal problem to capitalism. Of course, capitalist critics online will never mention that capitalism drives down labor demand by incentivizing technological innovation.

bugglebeetle 3y ago
“Societal problem” is doing a lot of work in your comment. Politicians repealing child labor laws so that corporations don’t have to pay more money for workers is not a “societal problem,” but one resulting from the naked reality of the wage relation.
effable 3y ago
So the argument is that since this criticism came from presumably a socialist, which we have no evidence for, we should not consider the criticism on its own merit?
- adasdasdas 3y ago
  I literally responded to the parent argument though. And yes I do assume vocal critics of capitalism online to be socialist, I'm happy for parent to prove me wrong :)
eyelidlessness 3y ago
> Of course, capitalist critics online will never mention that capitalism drives down labor demand by incentivizing technological innovation. I’d be delighted to concede that if it were true. To the extent capitalism does relieve demand for labor, it perpetually creates more demand however artificially, often explicitly on the arbitrary basis of labor itself as duty. To the extent it has yielded to a constant or increased demand for labor, it’s been a result of resistance to capitalism.
- adasdasdas 3y ago
  Ok so why has the average work day been dropping since the industrial revolution began. If you respond with: well unions fought for it: I'd say, that's partially true, but it wouldve only been possible if production efficiency grew, which it has been continuously over the past 300 years... because capitalism is the strongest driver of technological innovation. Secondly, this whole thing about artificial demand is bunk because you aren't forced to consume it in the first place. You are free to live the life of a 19th century man, and you really don't have to work very hard for it, because producing 19th century level goods is very very cheap.
  - eyelidlessness 3y ago
    I apologize for being glib but… your response sounds more like it was written by Marx than anything I could have written. It’s exactly his premise. Capitalism was a prerequisite for Marxist socialism precisely because of its productive qualities. Marxist Socialism was specifically conceived to address the way that disproportionately benefits a class of owners versus the class of workers who implement capitalism’s efficiencies.
    - adasdasdas 3y ago
      I'd be happier if more socialists actually read Marx. However, to your point. Marx thought that once our production ramped up enough, we could have everything we needed and overthrow our capital demons. He also thought that there was a ceiling to production innovation and that profits would eventually dry up due to competition. But its been 150 years and none of that is true, we're still getting better at doing things, and human appetite for consumption hasn't really slowed down. Some part of that is hierarchical, some people just want to be better than others and so their consumption is relative. This is where a lot of artificial scarcity is manufactured. But we still continue to solve very real problems, much of which is fueled by a capitalism.
      - berdario 3y ago
        > But its been 150 years and none of that is true, we're still getting better at doing things, and human appetite for consumption hasn't really slowed down. Citation needed. There have been several innovations since Marx's days, creating new products and services. And the population kept growing and growing. We're almost 8 billion people now. That by itself increases demand and opens new market (of course, improvements in logistics, shipping and communications are also what allows for actually opening new markets in countries previously underserved). "Software is eating the world", was true enough. But all services have been digitalized (not only private, but also the public administration), so I think that Software already ate the whole world. In a few decades, the population will also stop growing, and that will inevitably cause problems to those who have to try to find new markets to grow their production. So, the tendency of rate of profit to fall does not prevent the rise of companies like Google and Netflix. But even they have stopped growing as much as they did before, because they expanded to half of the world already, and now to increase profits they have to (for example): substantially increase advertisement in YouTube and crack down on password sharing for Netflix. Another component in their fight for profits, is reducing labor costs: we just started to see that happen with generalized layoffs in the tech sector (of course, that was just a small blips, there's a lot more to come in the next few decades). "Solve very real problems" is noble and a nice thought... But not all problems can be solved in a way that generates profits. The ceiling is not something that we will hit suddenly with a shock. The gradual trickle of innovations will continue

bugglebeetle 3y ago

“Societal problem” is doing a lot of work in your comment. Politicians repealing child labor laws so that corporations don’t have to pay more money for workers is not a “societal problem,” but one resulting from the naked reality of the wage relation.

effable 3y ago

So the argument is that since this criticism came from presumably a socialist, which we have no evidence for, we should not consider the criticism on its own merit?

adasdasdas 3y ago
I literally responded to the parent argument though. And yes I do assume vocal critics of capitalism online to be socialist, I'm happy for parent to prove me wrong :)

eyelidlessness 3y ago

> Of course, capitalist critics online will never mention that capitalism drives down labor demand by incentivizing technological innovation. I’d be delighted to concede that if it were true. To the extent capitalism does relieve demand for labor, it perpetually creates more demand however artificially, often explicitly on the arbitrary basis of labor itself as duty. To the extent it has yielded to a constant or increased demand for labor, it’s been a result of resistance to capitalism.

adasdasdas 3y ago
Ok so why has the average work day been dropping since the industrial revolution began. If you respond with: well unions fought for it: I'd say, that's partially true, but it wouldve only been possible if production efficiency grew, which it has been continuously over the past 300 years... because capitalism is the strongest driver of technological innovation. Secondly, this whole thing about artificial demand is bunk because you aren't forced to consume it in the first place. You are free to live the life of a 19th century man, and you really don't have to work very hard for it, because producing 19th century level goods is very very cheap.
- eyelidlessness 3y ago
  I apologize for being glib but… your response sounds more like it was written by Marx than anything I could have written. It’s exactly his premise. Capitalism was a prerequisite for Marxist socialism precisely because of its productive qualities. Marxist Socialism was specifically conceived to address the way that disproportionately benefits a class of owners versus the class of workers who implement capitalism’s efficiencies.
  - adasdasdas 3y ago
    I'd be happier if more socialists actually read Marx. However, to your point. Marx thought that once our production ramped up enough, we could have everything we needed and overthrow our capital demons. He also thought that there was a ceiling to production innovation and that profits would eventually dry up due to competition. But its been 150 years and none of that is true, we're still getting better at doing things, and human appetite for consumption hasn't really slowed down. Some part of that is hierarchical, some people just want to be better than others and so their consumption is relative. This is where a lot of artificial scarcity is manufactured. But we still continue to solve very real problems, much of which is fueled by a capitalism.
    - berdario 3y ago
      > But its been 150 years and none of that is true, we're still getting better at doing things, and human appetite for consumption hasn't really slowed down. Citation needed. There have been several innovations since Marx's days, creating new products and services. And the population kept growing and growing. We're almost 8 billion people now. That by itself increases demand and opens new market (of course, improvements in logistics, shipping and communications are also what allows for actually opening new markets in countries previously underserved). "Software is eating the world", was true enough. But all services have been digitalized (not only private, but also the public administration), so I think that Software already ate the whole world. In a few decades, the population will also stop growing, and that will inevitably cause problems to those who have to try to find new markets to grow their production. So, the tendency of rate of profit to fall does not prevent the rise of companies like Google and Netflix. But even they have stopped growing as much as they did before, because they expanded to half of the world already, and now to increase profits they have to (for example): substantially increase advertisement in YouTube and crack down on password sharing for Netflix. Another component in their fight for profits, is reducing labor costs: we just started to see that happen with generalized layoffs in the tech sector (of course, that was just a small blips, there's a lot more to come in the next few decades). "Solve very real problems" is noble and a nice thought... But not all problems can be solved in a way that generates profits. The ceiling is not something that we will hit suddenly with a shock. The gradual trickle of innovations will continue