Marx and Automation

[Alan Kerr]

@LBirdIt’s good that you study Marx.I know that you do study as you found and thought that you solved this problem. Here it is.Mind over matter and matter over mind. If it is, ideas which change matter and matter which changes ideas then which is the first cause?It’s to your credit that you got so far as to find this problem. Not all students get so far. Your wrong solution was to unify mind and matter in one social production. We can do that but it is no solution to the problem.I hope that you do get the real solution now. The real solution was in your quotes from Marx. We cannot choose our means to produce since they are the result of previous production. So we get the order of steps. We cannot choose the order of those steps. From this, we get the matter over mind view of both Marx and Engels.We need you. Thank you for bringing your ideas to this debate. 

[Anonymous]

Matt wrote:

MBellemare

Quote:

So, in answer to your question, Alan, how can we skip a stage of production? Well, didn't the soviet union do this? didn't they go from an agrarian society to a socialist society, by-passing the bourgeois captalist phase. They utilized force to initiate the by-pass, but there are more democratic manners by which to skip a stage of production. Don't you think?

Nonsense. An absurd statement.They had what was essentially a bourgeois revolution, from feudalism into capitalism and the Bolshevics mounted a coup, introducing  state capitalism.https://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/socialist-standard/1930s/1934/no-353-january-1934/bolshevism-past-and-presentSocialism/communism is a post-capitalist development.

This is the best  antidote to that distortionhttps://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/pamphlets/why-russian-revolution-wasnt-socialist-revolution. Lenin discredited Martov because he knew that he was right Lenin book titled The Development of Capitalism in Russia, clearly indicates that Russia was not ready for socialism yet, it was ready to go from Feudalism to capitalism, and these are the innovators who want to give lectures to the Socialist Partyhttps://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1899/devel/

[Anonymous]

How does the manager make the choice? 

Tim Kilgallon wrote:

Alan Kerr wrote:

Form F wrote:

Alan Kerr wrote:

@Form FThank you,Of course, the manager of the capitalist firm tries to make most profit in shortest time. 

This doesn't answer my question. How does the manager make the choice?

I’m no expert. But I would choose 1) on money cost and 2) on the way to turn capital over in shortest time. For a big firm I would get the best deal I could for kiln. 

my experience is that assuming the manager is a man he would either;a) give the contract to his mate from the same Masonic Lodgeb) give the contract to a bloke he knows who will take him down to the golf course and then fill him full of lagerc) give it to the same bloke he always does, cos he can't be arsed to look any further.d) undertake some basic research and award it to the one which meets his half baked ideas of how the job should be done, with no real reference to the people who are going to use the wood or live in the house that was made by the wood.Which is the real nature of capitalism, not the ultra efficient notional vision of the Thatcherites or the Adam Smith Institute

How does the manager make the choice!?!?!?  the more relevant question in capitalism is "how does society choose the manager who make the choice".  == = = = = = = == = =  = = = = = = =In capitalism, there's a sort of competitive feedbck loop where presumably there is some sort of competition in the marketplace.  So if two companies both produce wood, then the price of the wood will be different depending on each individual managers decision making ability.  Company A) So if Jane, a manager at "More Wood for Us", decides to give the contract to the woman from her sewing circle, then that results in a price of the wood of say $5/board.    Company Meenwhile, Monique, a manager at "Hard Wood Forever" company decides to give her contract to the woman recommended by "the socialistica's reviews latest ratings on best wood producers" which is a national industry review magazine and effectively delegates the decision to the reviewing agency who tells her to give the contract to a company called "social wood works" then that rsults in a price for the wood of $6/board in the marketplace.- — – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – — – – So in capitalism, then "the market" decides who to buy from and who gets money and the opportunity to continue being the decision maker.  If people think the "Hard Wood Forever" company has better wood that will last for longer then they buy from that company even at a higher price and next year the "Hard Wood Forever" company manager, Monique, will have more voting shares (aka money, aka decision making power) on how more wood should be produced.  In capitalism the marketplace is in theory the ultimate arbitar of decision making power that is collected from individuals one dollar vote at a time and consolidated into the decision making power of the manager or business owner.  It really doesn't matter in capitalism the details of how Jane or monique make her decisions and they might keep those decisions secret in capitalism as well as their decision making criteria secret from the public.  In capitalism the important thing is the assumption that the costs and price to consumer will reflect the decision making wisdom of the manager and that will result in an increase or decrease in the decision making power of the manager. It's a rather long chain of accountability and feedback with lots of places for corruption and failure, but it does at least offer the promise of individuals determining the means of production and the mode of production.  In theory everyone could refuse to buy anything not reviewed and endorsed by "the socilistica's reviews latest ratings of best people to buy from and best prices" and thereby everyone acting together in solidarity would simply stop buying from capitialist corporations that exploit the workers.  +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++in socialism I have no idea how things work or how they fail or who or what decides these matters or even who or what decides who or what decides these matters.  Different responses have been suggested for Socialism such as "there will be no property" or an enlightened something or somoene decides based on class prejudice, or more commonly "voting".  Presumably there is some long chain of voting that can also be corrupted but in theory you could vote to decide who votes to decide what based on their voting history?  In socialism presumably you could even vote to buy from capitalism through some mechanism?  – — – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – — – – Sorry, I'm not drawing from marx for this example.  My forte is capitalism mechanics and most of the marx I read or hear about seems focused on political thoery. So from what I understand Socialism says this conversation about producing wood doesn't matter and redirects the discussion to topics of class exploitation in which the managers Jane and Monique are both assumed to be in business together and both act in collusion or inderect collusion to exploit the people they sell wood too in a capitalist economy.  Exactly why or how jane and monique don't colllude or work to advantage themselves at the expense of others in socialism is not clear to me.  Some suggestions I've heard include the idea that they have an abundance of resources so they act out of kind hearted generousity. ==============================The more relevant question is socialism seems to be "why would anyone be greedy when there's plenty to go around and it feels good to help others"?  ` . . . .. . . . .. . . . .. . . . .Sorry, this is just my humble understanding and probably wrong on many accounts. Feel free to correct or revise to make it better.  Feel free to vote this as unworthy of paying attention too or you can buy into my description by responding positively.  There's unlimited space available and an abundance of discussion forums so you can also answer with a link to a new discussion thread you create for free with a automated form voting process.  Both capitalism and socialism seem to have a problem with organizing conversation threads that is dependenent on the concious behavior or the forum users and the automation of the forum discussion software. For both capitalist and socialist, the correct response to any off topic or further replies not directly related to marx and automation would be for YOU to make a link to a new discussion thread that you create and copy my comment into the top post and then add your long reply there.  then YOU should come back to this thread and add only a small reply with a link to the new discussion thread you created so as not to confuse this discussion of Marx and Automation.  I think the Mods can maybe do this too since any regular user can do what I just described.  It seems there's a scarcity of time at present that makes all people unwilling or reluctant to contribute their individual efforts and time towards the community good of a more organized discussion forum.  Perhaps I should have created a new thread and posted this long detailed reply there and then come back to here and just put in a short link to a discussion thread I create titled "answer my question. How does the manager make the choice?". if you agree that's what I should have done, you should not reply or tell me because that would be a form of a survey which is banned on this discussion board without moderators approval in advance. So it's up to the mod to initiate the process for such a group recomendation as far as I understand it.

[Alan Kerr]

@Steve-San FranciscoWhat do you think of this chapter?https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/wage-labour/ch03.htm

[Anonymous]

Alan Kerr wrote:

@Steve-San FranciscoWhat do you think of this chapter?https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/wage-labour/ch03.htm

I made a new thread to discuss this ridiculous excuse for a market model. For marx time it was great, but Marx was writing at time when math and reason were not so very advanced by the standards and understanding of today.  Marx was one of the first to think about these things and can be forgiven for producing a very crude and simplistic understanding of the market.  At the time no one else had any better understanding of the market, so he deserves credit like the way plato deserves credit.  But you can't do modern science with plato's thoery of perfect forms in place of congnitive psychology and set theory.  Also yu can't understand modern chemistrry with plato's brilliant theory of the 4 elements earth air fire and water.  I think the idea that everything is made up of either "earth, air, fire, or water" is ridiculous too. Don't get your panties in a wedgie just because I criticize Plato or Marx using the same criteria.  Here's details. https://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/forum/topic/discussion-archive-marx-works-1847-wage-labour-ch03#comment-43389

[Anonymous]

Steve-SanFrancisco-UserExperienceResearchSpecialist wrote:

Alan Kerr wrote:

@Steve-San FranciscoWhat do you think of this chapter?https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/wage-labour/ch03.htm

I made a new thread to discuss this ridiculous excuse for a market model. For marx time it was great, but Marx was writing at time when math and reason were not so very advanced by the standards and understanding of today.  Marx was one of the first to think about these things and can be forgiven for producing a very crude and simplistic understanding of the market.  At the time no one else had any better understanding of the market, so he deserves credit like the way plato deserves credit.  But you can't do modern science with plato's thoery of perfect forms in place of congnitive psychology and set theory.  Also yu can't understand modern chemistrry with plato's brilliant theory of the 4 elements earth air fire and water.  I think the idea that everything is made up of either "earth, air, fire, or water" is ridiculous too. Don't get your panties in a wedgie just because I criticize Plato or Marx using the same criteria.  Here's details. https://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/forum/topic/discussion-archive-marx-works-1847-wage-labour-ch03#comment-43389

Out of track clarification: Nobody has to be a mathematician in order to understand what the capitalist market really is. War is a product of the market system, and peace among the capitalist is also a war for the market. Marx did not use mathematics in order to explain the logic of capitalism or the system of profits. WWI and WWII, the Iraq war, conflict among capitalists,  etc, etc, are the product of the capitalist market. The whole world is controlled by the market, therefore, socialist advocate for the end of the market system, and we do not need mathematics for that

[alanjjohnstone]

This article seems to e of interest even though it still supports the idea of capitalism's existence as the only alternativehttps://www.buzzfeed.com/tedchiang/the-real-danger-to-civilization-isnt-ai-its-runaway?utm_term=.hxzyAbYZG#.bkjDNAJkK

Quote:

I realized that we are already surrounded by machines that demonstrate a complete lack of insight, we just call them corporations. Corporations don’t operate autonomously, of course, and the humans in charge of them are presumably capable of insight, but capitalism doesn’t reward them for using it. On the contrary, capitalism actively erodes this capacity in people by demanding that they replace their own judgment of what “good” means with “whatever the market decides.”

  

[Anonymous]

Evidence of a statement that I made in this thread. Naomi Klein promotes pro-war as an antidote for the far right. One of the darlings of the lefthttp://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2018/06/01/klei-j01.html

[Anonymous]

It seems like fake news to me…Marcos. Klein does not concern herself with attracting the alt-right. In any event, this thread was about value/price. And contrary to Marx, and Andrew Kliman, value/price is an arbitrary conceptual construct, especially within post-industrial, post-modern capitalism, based solely on capitalist power, that is, what a capitalist entity can get away with in the production sphere and the marketplace, pertaining to his/her own artificial determination of a specific value/price.Anarchism, Now! Anarchism, Forever!

[DJP]

MBellemare wrote:

And contrary to Marx, and Andrew Kliman, value/price is an arbitrary conceptual construct, especially within post-industrial, post-modern capitalism, based solely on capitalist power, that is, what a capitalist entity can get away with in the production sphere and the marketplace, pertaining to his/her own artificial determination of a specific value/price.Anarchism, Now! Anarchism, Forever!

Capitalism is a world system it will never be “post industrial”. “What a capitalist entity can get away with in the marketplace” Is precisely what value theory studies… The price is always what the market can bear. But what factors determine that?

[Anonymous]

It is post-industrial in the sense that the majority of work done today is unquantifiable. There is no such thing as the regulatory mechanism of socially necessary labor-time, anymore. To quote, Paul Feyerabend, "Anything Goes", today. Marx's value theory today is thus obsolete, despite being a beautifully rational theory. 

[Anonymous]

@MBellemere and DJP.I have decided to take direct political action based on your discussion below and my Time Value Accounting theories of marketplace activity.  Please consider how you would vote on a San Francisco Vote to Act poll proposal.  I present the voting options as a directly relevant economic thought experiment that I think you could understand, and I would like to know how each of you and anyone else would vote on this topic. @moderators,you are invited to move this conversation or hide it if MBellemere or DJP object and I'm writing to them speceifically and to others if interested as a response in this discussion thread becasue it's relevant and inclusive to share publicly.  You have my permission to move this comment to a new article you create or add it to some appropriate forum and replace my full comment here with a link to the the comment if that form of censorship will be sufficient for your goals. If it's the public poll or endorsement of political candidates that offends you into censorship, then can you just consider them as Quoted material for consideration (aka "this is not a pipe" – Rene Maggrite)? Otherwise if you just delete this without explanation, I'll probably just repost it without explanation like any good socialist does when encountering random capitalist inspired censorship norms and conventions.  If this is a control issue for you about me going through your channels and submitting a proposal to ask people questions or endorse a political candidate or opinion then consider this my request and submission. These views do not represent and are not intended to represent the views of SPGB or you personally and you are invited to speceifically suggest a redacted version that is less offensive to you or present solutions to any  other objections you wish to make publicly in your reply. Thx. @ All readersl:Thank you for your time and you're invited to vote in my informal unofficial poll on economics of time value and the marketplace thought experiments.  This poll vote to act economic thought experiment question was created for the Radical Transparency Party of San Francisco, CA.  For everyones convenience, please respond with a comment and a simple poll vote for "more comments from Steve San Francisco" or "less comments form Steve San Francicso".  Then add to your reply any detailed thoughts you would like to share. 

DJP wrote:

MBellemare wrote:

And contrary to Marx, and Andrew Kliman, value/price is an arbitrary conceptual construct, especially within post-industrial, post-modern capitalism, based solely on capitalist power, that is, what a capitalist entity can get away with in the production sphere and the marketplace, pertaining to his/her own artificial determination of a specific value/price.Anarchism, Now! Anarchism, Forever!

Capitalism is a world system it will never be “post industrial”. “What a capitalist entity can get away with in the marketplace” Is precisely what value theory studies… The price is always what the market can bear. But what factors determine that?

The below information is quoted from one of several online polls, comments and discussions. Please consider the rest of this text below to be quoted material.  Let me know if you want direct links to the quoted material that I have spent my time to copy here for your convenience and enjoyment 5-15 minutes reading + voting time effort. Thanks.Those are some really good questions that I've been thinking about for a while. Here's a brief example of how better pricing can solve poverty and make a profit at the same time. This is just one of the many public survey poll votes on public pricing and profit topics that explain how Amy Weiss can and should lead San Francisco to a kinder, greener, safer future at a price that profits everybody equally. Imagine an economic thought experiment with 1 landlord who has 3 units all the same to rent to 3 people. 1 person makes $10/hr, 1@$50/hr, and 1@$250/hr. in this thought experiment the apartment is worth the same 50 hours a month of effort in value to everyone equally (1/3 of income approx.). How much should the seller charge for the apt on the rooms for rent ad? A) Advertise the rent at “$500”. The poor person works 50 hours to pay for the housing and makes 0 hours profit. The middle income person works 10 hours to pay for the housing and makes 40 hours profit. The rich person works 2 hours to pay for housing and makes 48 hours profit.Landlord Profit = 1,500 = 1@$500 +1@$500 + 1@$500. Advertise the rent at “$2500”.The poor person works 250 hours to pay for the housing and is homeless leaving the unit vacant. The middle income person works 50 hours to pay for the housing and makes 0 hours profit. The rich person works 10 hours to pay for housing and makes 40 hours profit.Landlord Profit = 5,000 = 1@$2500 +1@$2500 + 1@$0 (no sale vacant unit).C) Advertise the rent at “$12,500”.The poor person works 1250 hours to pay for the housing and is homeless leaving the unit vacant. The middle income person has to work 250 hours to pay for the housing and is homeless leaving the 2nd unit vacant.. The rich person works 50 hours to pay for housing and makes 0 hours profit.Landlord Profit = 12,500 = 1@$12,500 +1@0(vacant) + 1@$0 (no sale vacant unit).D) Advertise the rent at "50 hours of time/Calculate dollar price based on each person's individualized $/hr rate.The poor person works 50 hours to pay for housing and makes 0 hours profit.The middle class person works 50 hours to pay for housing and makes 0 hours profit.The rich person works 50 hours to pay for housing and makes 0 hours profit.Landlord Profit = $16,000 = 1@$12,500 +1@$2500 + 1@$500E) Other, vote for Amy Weiss https://www.facebook.com/amyfarah.weiss For SF Mayor and optional watch her video live cast live 40 hours a week unedited. She’s the best choice for implementing the infrastructure the public needs to buy and sell in “hours of your time”  fastest for the public and she can offer the radical transparency and public accountability that the public deserves. She imagines a world where you can walk into a StarBucks and pay more for your coffee to get no wait in line. Can you imagine a world where you can pay zero dollars for your coffee or bus fair or dinner or apartment if you’re destitute, but willing to wait in line till after the rich people leave. Will you vote with your dollars and your values to choose to shop at a less busy StarBucks and rent a less convenient apartments if you are poor and all the great housing is taken by rich people first? Amy Weiss has a plan for how seller can make a guaranteed profit and rich people can get a guaranteed time savings and poor people can get a guaranteed price reduction. Included in the plan is a for profit free market solution for free healthcare, a seller funded Universal Basic Income, A solution to homelessness, and healthier foods at lower prices and better quality.

[Anonymous]

MBellemare wrote:

It seems like fake news to me…Marcos. Klein does not concern herself with attracting the alt-right. In any event, this thread was about value/price. And contrary to Marx, and Andrew Kliman, value/price is an arbitrary conceptual construct, especially within post-industrial, post-modern capitalism, based solely on capitalist power, that is, what a capitalist entity can get away with in the production sphere and the marketplace, pertaining to his/her own artificial determination of a specific value/price.Anarchism, Now! Anarchism, Forever!

how can it be fake news when they are citing words by words of what she has and has writen  ?  This is not the first that a left winger has supported capitalism and pro war parties. They have a long history of that type of actions , a left wingers is just a reformist like any other right  winger . They are not relevant and with them socialism has not advanced one inch, on the contrary they have prolongad capitalism . I know them pretty well and I know all their distorted theories and tactics, that is reason why I am hereThe main problem of the world is not Donald Trump or the Republican Party, or fascism, or nationalism, the problem is capitalism and all of our problems arise from this mode of production and they take place at the point of production  even more , Trump is a product of capitalism and the left wingers like her due to the fact that they have poisoned the minds of the workers wit fake theories , they are the real fake news Your conceptions are as fake as her reformist and social Democrats conceptions. About the main topic on this thread it has been debunked already and it is fake theory too DJP already ady hammered the last nail on the coffin 

[DJP]

MBellemare wrote:

It is post-industrial in the sense that the majority of work done today is unquantifiable. There is no such thing as the regulatory mechanism of socially necessary labor-time, anymore. To quote, Paul Feyerabend, "Anything Goes", today. Marx's value theory today is thus obsolete, despite being a beautifully rational theory. 

What is you think is actually different between “industrial” and “post industrial” capitalism. What do mean most work today is “unquantifiable”? How is that different from previous eras of capitalism?

[Anonymous]

MBellemare wrote:

It seems like fake news to me…Marcos. Klein does not concern herself with attracting the alt-right. In any event, this thread was about value/price. And contrary to Marx, and Andrew Kliman, value/price is an arbitrary conceptual construct, especially within post-industrial, post-modern capitalism, based solely on capitalist power, that is, what a capitalist entity can get away with in the production sphere and the marketplace, pertaining to his/her own artificial determination of a specific value/price.Anarchism, Now! Anarchism, Forever!

stop calling yourselves an anarchist because you are not. Anarchist do not support the state, leaders and reformism. Do not discredit real anarchist and Marx was an anarchist too. Noam Chomsky calls himself an anarchist and he has supported state capitalism and its leaders and he has called workers to vote for capitalist parties. He is in the same line like Naomi Klein 

[Author]

Posts