c4countdown

Carl Marx foretold that Capitalism, having no solid base, would collapse in itself. Capitalism must always generate growth, causing constantly rising prices coupled with currency losing value, which then generates the need to obtain more of it in order to live. Considering the financial plight of the banks, and the massive debt incurred to save them, was he right?

How's North Korea looking these days?

Charlie Reams wrote:How's North Korea looking these days?

One wrong does not make any rights.

Charlie Reams wrote:How's North Korea looking these days?

I believe that I read it somewhere Charlie, that in North Korea, Cocoa Cola was the most common advert. We mustn't let our contempt for a different Ideology get in the way of profit.

George F. Jenkins wrote:Cocoa Cola

You've given me an idea...Duncan Bannatyne here I come.

Edit: Oh crap the Dragon's Den has closed for another year. Fuck.

George F. Jenkins wrote:

Charlie Reams wrote:How's North Korea looking these days?

I believe that I read it somewhere Charlie, that in North Korea, Cocoa Cola was the most common advert. We mustn't let our contempt for a different Ideology get in the way of profit.

You're right, sugary soft drinks are the biggest problem facing North Korea today. No wonder they have an obesity epidemic.

George F. Jenkins wrote:Carl Marx foretold that Capitalism, having no solid base, would collapse in itself. Capitalism must always generate growth, causing constantly rising prices coupled with currency losing value, which then generates the need to obtain more of it in order to live. Considering the financial plight of the banks, and the massive debt incurred to save them, was he right?

I don't think it has collapsed. The FTSE 100 has been buoyant of late, its current value of around 5500 isn't a far cry from its all-time high of just shy of 7000 (in 1999), and some parts of the public sector could learn a thing or two about efficiency.

Just because some of the banks - not all of them - behaved irresponsibly doesn't mean that businesses also did or do.

George F. Jenkins wrote:I believe that I read it somewhere Charlie, that in North Korea, Cocoa Cola was the most common advert. We mustn't let our contempt for a different Ideology get in the way of profit.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/mytripsmypics/2485992393/

Jeff Clayton wrote:

George F. Jenkins wrote:Carl Marx foretold that Capitalism, having no solid base, would collapse in itself. Capitalism must always generate growth, causing constantly rising prices coupled with currency losing value, which then generates the need to obtain more of it in order to live. Considering the financial plight of the banks, and the massive debt incurred to save them, was he right?

I don't think it has collapsed. The FTSE 100 has been buoyant of late, its current value of around 5500 isn't a far cry from its all-time high of just shy of 7000 (in 1999), and some parts of the public sector could learn a thing or two about efficiency.

Just because some of the banks - not all of them - behaved irresponsibly doesn't mean that businesses also did or do.

I like and apreciate your answer Jeff. But I understand that the possible collapse of banking is world wide, with the interest on money borrowed to prop them up running into millions of pounds. We hear of banks refusing to lend money for mortgages etc, for which I thought they existed for. I can only go by the news we hear, or is it exagerated for gloom and doom effect

Jeff Clayton wrote:

George F. Jenkins wrote:Carl Marx foretold that Capitalism, having no solid base, would collapse in itself. Capitalism must always generate growth, causing constantly rising prices coupled with currency losing value, which then generates the need to obtain more of it in order to live. Considering the financial plight of the banks, and the massive debt incurred to save them, was he right?

I don't think it has collapsed. The FTSE 100 has been buoyant of late, its current value of around 5500 isn't a far cry from its all-time high of just shy of 7000 (in 1999), and some parts of the public sector could learn a thing or two about efficiency.

Just because some of the banks - not all of them - behaved irresponsibly doesn't mean that businesses also did or do.

I like and apreciate your answer Jeff. But I understand that the possible collapse of banking is world wide, with the interest on money borrowed to prop them up running into millions of pounds. We hear of banks refusing to lend money for mortgages etc, for which I thought they existed for. I can only go by the news we hear, or is it exagerated for gloom and doom effect

George F. Jenkins wrote:the interest on money borrowed to prop them up running into millions of pounds

Charlie Reams wrote:

George F. Jenkins wrote:the interest on money borrowed to prop them up running into millions of pounds

There is always a better answer.

IS THIS CAPITALISM?

George F. Jenkins wrote:Carl Marx foretold that Capitalism, having no solid base, would collapse in itself. Capitalism must always generate growth, causing constantly rising prices coupled with currency losing value, which then generates the need to obtain more of it in order to live. Considering the financial plight of the banks, and the massive debt incurred to save them, was he right?

Any relation to Karl Marx?

As for variations in the FTSE it has been regularly popping between 2200 and 8000 every seven years: boom and bust, anyone?

What is the real problem with capitalism?

It introduces a medium by which value is assessed and this medium may lose/gain value independently of the value of the thing-in-itself. It's introduces the spectre of speculation in what were previously held to be concrete values.

My height is 5' 7" (no sniggering at the back) and let's assume some people think the notion of my height is a commodity in which we may invest. Some photos are posted that suggest my height is considerably shorter (I am standing next to Tom Cruise and look like a garden gnome) so investors are advised that my stock is worthless and pull out the funds; conversely, I am photographed with Shaquille O'Neill as he looks up at me in wonderment so investors think I have been undervalued and murder their wife (make it look like suicide) and claim the insurance so they can invest every last penny in my stock: have I ceased to be 5'7"? No, the introduction of a medium for determining value has made it easier for people to mobilise value and speculate upon its future trends.

The command system has weaknesses too: it does not have a mechanism that accurately ascribes value to various attributes (omfg, it's the same weakness!! lol iawt imho etc bs). The government determines value and while this does not endure the ignominy of market conditions it is open to abuse. Even if it weren't and we all value each attribute the same like my being 5'7" and Shaq being 7'1" it's hard to understand Shaq's motivation if he's considered as valuable a basketball player as me.

The bright side

Every economy in the world is aware of this dichotomy and strives for balance between the two.


Karl Marx is right but then he isn't; Milton Friedman is right but then he isn't: the real question is not which dead philosopher/economist got it right but what balance is right?

I really don't have a fucking clue.

David O'Donnell wrote:Any relation to Karl Marx?

I resisted pointing this out, I thought the arguments presented were bad enough in themselves...

Charlie Reams wrote:

David O'Donnell wrote:Any relation to Karl Marx?

I resisted pointing this out, I thought the arguments presented were bad enough in themselves...

I dunno, that argument is pretty much the standard union one. Given that Mr Jenkins is probably a trade unionist (no offence if I have this wrong) with the standard Marxist message it's actually not a complete misrepresentation of Marx's. Put it this way: I'd rather have a pint with him than some cunt who works on Canary Wharf.

David O'Donnell wrote: Given that Mr Jenkins is probably a trade unionist

He advertised being rich when it suited his purposes for that particular argument, so I dunno.

Incidentally at Cambridge there are two rival Marxist reading groups who have splintered over some minor issue and thereby diluted whatever limited effect they might hope to have. Also they're run by rich public school types. Mmm, synecdoche.

Charlie Reams wrote:

David O'Donnell wrote: Given that Mr Jenkins is probably a trade unionist

He advertised being rich when it suited his purposes for that particular argument, so I dunno.

Incidentally at Cambridge there are two rival Marxist reading groups who have splintered over some minor issue and thereby diluted whatever limited effect they might hope to have. Also they're run by rich public school types. Mmm, synecdoche.

Well, he has earned the right to be a rich pensioner, not sure how that dilutes his argument of being a poor rail trade unionist back in the day.

As for Marxist groups who splinter ... best result: couldn't be splintered enough: turns out Marxism is dangerous though not quite as dangerous as unlimited free trade.

David O'Donnell wrote:What is the real problem with capitalism?

It introduces a medium by which value is assessed and this medium may lose/gain value independently of the value of the thing-in-itself. It's introduces the spectre of speculation in what were previously held to be concrete values.

But didn't this arise right from Capitalist Day 1, when Ig the caveman offered Ug 1 rabbit skin for a meal of buffalo meat? There was always the chance that Og might offer a wife instead, thus inflating (or possibly reducing) the value of buffalo.

David Roe wrote:

David O'Donnell wrote:What is the real problem with capitalism?

It introduces a medium by which value is assessed and this medium may lose/gain value independently of the value of the thing-in-itself. It's introduces the spectre of speculation in what were previously held to be concrete values.

But didn't this arise right from Capitalist Day 1, when Ig the caveman offered Ug 1 rabbit skin for a meal of buffalo meat? There was always the chance that Og might offer a wife instead, thus inflating (or possibly reducing) the value of buffalo.

My point was that there is no purely free-market or command economy.

Though, I agree, once a medium for value is introduced there are a multitude of new problems that arise. The same thing happens with language: it's supposed to be something we use to express ourselves but language can become something that determines the parameters of our expression.

Charlie Reams wrote:

David O'Donnell wrote:Any relation to Karl Marx?

I resisted pointing this out, I thought the arguments presented were bad enough in themselves...

Oops! Sorry Charlie, I had the English version of the name Karl in my mind, and do you mean that the subject was bad, or the answers it generated.

David O'Donnell wrote:

Charlie Reams wrote:

David O'Donnell wrote:Any relation to Karl Marx?

I resisted pointing this out, I thought the arguments presented were bad enough in themselves...

I dunno, that argument is pretty much the standard union one. Given that Mr Jenkins is probably a trade unionist (no offence if I have this wrong) with the standard Marxist message it's actually not a complete misrepresentation of Marx's. Put it this way: I'd rather have a pint with him than some cunt who works on Canary Wharf.

I was a trade unionist David, and a branch secretary. I resigned from that position when a member asked me to meet the management about a complaint that he had. I did that and the Shed Master explained to me how that driver was wrong. He then gave me some advice. If a driver or fireman complained, tell them to put their complaint in writing. So I did, and I suddenly became known as an arrogant, know all, know nothing bastard. Up to that time I'd attended eleven monthly branch meetings with all the latest news from head office to read to the men, but not a single member turned up. So much for the untrue reputation of militant engine drivers. I chucked it in on the twelfth month. as for politics I am a labour man, of the 1945 kind of labour party. Definitely not new labour. As for communism. We had only one communist at my depot, Hither Green. we liked to get him going on workers solidarity etc. Being rich? I feel rich because we have no debts and the mortgage is paid up. The money we have is our pensions mounting up in the bank because we have everything we need for a home. We have just bought three new television sets, one for each room, and the new digital and high definition sets are lovely to watch. I must confess that the bank balance swelled when I sold our car for £1400, because I was no longer safe driving. We are lucky that we get free train travel, but don't forget that this was calculated in any cost of living wage rises, so over the years it was paid for out of wages that we should have got.

George F. Jenkins wrote:

but don't forget that this was calculated in any cost of living wage rises, so over the years it was paid for out of wages that we should have got.

I don't think anyone would begrudge you a comfortable retirement, George.