Young Master Smeet
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Yes, so, for example, they state: “core states and firms leverage their geopolitical and commercial power to compress wages, prices and profits in the global South, both at the level of national economies as well as within global commodity chains (which account for more than 70% of trade), such that Southern prices are systematically lower relative to Northern prices13,14. Price inequalities compel Southern states and producers to export more labour and resources embodied in traded goods to the global North each year in order to pay for any given level of imports, enabling Northern economies to net-appropriate value to the benefit of Northern capital and consumers.”
Also, I think they leave out Varoufakis’ global minotaur here: owners elites in the global south export their capital back to the core, rather than investing locally, so the global pool of capital, although housed in the core in fact represents all capitalists.
And: “structural adjustment programmes (SAPs)[…] devalued Southern currencies, cut public employment and removed labour and environmental protections, imposing downward pressure on wages and prices. They also curtailed industrial policy and state-led investment in technological development and compelled Southern governments to prioritise ‘export-oriented’ production in highly competitive sectors and in subordinate positions within global commodity chains. At the same time, lead firms in the core states have shifted industrial production to the global South to take direct advantage of cheaper wages and production costs, while leveraging their dominance within global commodity chains to squeeze the wages and profits of Southern producers. These interventions have further increased the North’s relative purchasing power over Southern labour and goods.”
On what counts as North/South: “Our category for the global North approximates the IMF list of ‘advanced economies’, with the South comprising all emerging and developing economies”
This from the tables is interesting:
Across the global North in 1995 hours worked per worker was 1895 in 1995 but 1770 in 2021 whereas in the South it was 2216 and 2236: it seems the growth in Southern labour has been extensive rather than intensive, but the case remains that there seems to be a greater level of exploitation.
As anyone who has dealt with a standard procurement contract under capitalism will tell you, the specifications run to way more than cost: if you need 5mm steel nails with teflon coating, that’s what you state. As you say, with the Soviet (I think it was actually steel plates) target by weight it was an arbitrary measurable target set from the centre. But when the customer tells you what they want, and your target is to satisfy measured customer demand (or negotiate to alter their demand based on what is easier for you to produce, could you make do with 6mm nails?).
Kantorovich’s linear equations do allow to make rational decisions between productive units to match required outputs: in his version, these outputs would be set by a central plan, but there is no reason why they could not also work for matching real expressed demand. If need be, per Dworkins cited in Dapprich, adjusted winner auctions are a useful functional way of expressing real desire/need (there is an issue, but not insurmountable of who needs to bid). Lloyd Shapley’s stable matching algorithms are also a useful method, both are rational ways of dealing with measuring demand that do not require commodity exchange. Even Dapprich’s tokens are fine: Kantorovich linear algebra to match real token demand would be functional.
As some writers have pointed out, Amazon is leading the way with this, and the reality is that you don’t need to hit optimal efficiency, but tend toward it.
Per Bijou Drains above: in reality, efficiency doesn’t matter as long as the targets, the outcomes are rational and they are met: socialism would not be a labour sparing system, and in the final analysis, that’s the nub of Mises’ complaint, that socialism isn’t capitalism.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election/2024/uk/constituencies/E14001175
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election/2024/uk/constituencies/E14001239Folkestone & Hythe 71 votes
Clapham & Brixton, 122 votesBeen out and voted: poll counters out for Corbyn and Labour only, no sign of the liberals or Conservatives. Volunteers leafletting the Tube station at Tufnell Park, and I spotted Get Out The Vote volunteers for Feinstein in Camden, I do wonder if he’ll get a measurable vote against Mr. Starmer?
So, looking at the RN manifesto, a few points stick out: there’s nothing =in there we haven’t seen from the Tories.
https://rassemblementnational.fr/22-mesures
They want to create citizen initiatives and electoral PR (they have suffered under the French system, but at least they clearly aren’t promising to end democracy).
They seem to want school uniforms and proper discipline.
“Mettre en place le patriotisme économique pour réindustrialiser et produire les richesses en France.”
Sounds like Starmerism.
“Garantir aux paysans des prix respectueux de leur travail et mettre un terme aux marges abusives de la grande distribution.”
Pitching for the peasant vote.
“Favoriser l’accès à la propriété et au logement des Français”
The Tories have done that here, vile racist stuff. Liekwise, they promise an end to immigration and an attack on Islamism.
They seem to have basically become the face of whatever French is for saloon bar bore.
A thing to consider, the now largely defunct republican Party completely dominate the Senate (it is elected by local councils, and the number of conservative rural councils have always predominated against the highly populous Paris and other cities. The next Senate election is 2026, so as RN makes gains in local government, it may increase representation in the Senate, until then, it will be a block on their programme: the question of whether the Gaullist right will capitulate to RN or obstruct will be interesting. The senate is elected by halves, so even in 2026 it’ll be unlikely for RN to make a majority. The big showdown will come in 2027 when Macron’s term is up.
The current betting seems to me to be a minority RN administration, limping on from vote to vote unable to enact its programme. Whether this will galvanise or drain it’s supporters is the big question. But France seems set for paralysis for several years.
First exit poll:
National Rally: 34%
New Popular Front: 28.1%
French President Macron’s centrist Ensemble alliance: 20.3%
Republicans: 10.2%Could be enough for an RN majority….
Lizzie45: when people act, they act consciously: when feudalism was enacted, it was the conscious creation and recreation of systems, procedures and ways of organising that suited the actors involved. When capitalism replaced it, ideologues created descriptions of the entire world and the agents who created capitalism did so in line with a conscious set of ideas (as did those who opposed them): socialism will be the first time that the majority of the population will be capable of being the agents.
Well, there’s conflicting reports he may well still be alive, but we should certainly commission the obituary and have it ready.
Just checked, anyone with more than 12% goes through, but in practice that will be the top three. If RN come first, and Macronists 2nd, I’d expect NPF to split and give some votes to the Macronists. I don’t think the favour would be reciprocated, so NPF will only win seats basically, I suspect, where they already hold them, and where they come first in the first round.
These have undoubtedly been the wildest 72 hours in French politics in my lifetime. Pretty incredible stuff.
A 🧵
— Arnaud Bertrand (@RnaudBertrand) June 13, 2024
Apparently things are a bit hectic in France, the left have formed a popular front (including the “Socialist” Party), while the republican party has descended into chaos over whether to bloc with the national front, whilst other right wing parties descend into infighting: maybe Macron has wrong footed everyone.
With the French voting system, it means the New Popular Front should make it to the second round (I believe top 3 go through in Parliamentary elections).
