What is economic growth?
- This topic has 2 replies, 1 voice, and was last updated 7 years, 2 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Wed, 08/02/2017 – 2:06pm
That's because they are measuring actual labour rather than socially necessary labour. Don't know how you would measure the latter. Not sure you can.
I know that you won't take kindly to my appearance on this thread, ALB, so I'll make it short and sweet.
Since this form of 'labour' is 'socially necessary', only the society that determines its own necessities can 'measure' its labour; and furthermore, only it can determine its 'measures'.
Within a democratic society, like socialism/communism, only the democratic producers can determine their own necessities and their own measures.
I would suggest that 'voting' would be an appropriate method for 'measuring'.
So, I think we can 'measure socially necessary labour', and indeed will do so within socialism. This social estimation will not, of course, involve 'money'.
In criticising various schemes for "labour money" in his day Marx suggested it couldn't be.
Do you have an information where Marx suggested it could be, where he wasn't talking about 'money' (or any of its supposed 'objective' forms)? I suspect that Marx didn't talk about the future social measures of 'necessity' which we might use, but you might know of some discussion which touches on this area.
If you don't wish to reply to my question, just ignore this post, and I'll leave the thread alone.
How about a trade. If ALB answers your question to him on this thread, then you agree to answer my question to you on the "good article" thread?
Wed, 08/02/2017 – 2:20pm#9LBirdOfflineJoined: 21/07/2013Send PM Tim Kilgallon wrote: How about a trade. If ALB answers your question to him on this thread, then you agree to answer my question to you on the "good article" thread? Since you appear to be incapable of reading what I write, and, through your own frustration at your own lack of comprehension, always turn to abuse, I think that I'll decline your 'trade', since I would be trading my valuable discussion for your childish taunts
report editdeletequotereplyWed, 08/02/2017 – 2:44pm#10Tim KilgallonOfflineJoined: 17/11/2015Send PM LBird wrote: Tim Kilgallon wrote: How about a trade. If ALB answers your question to him on this thread, then you agree to answer my question to you on the "good article" thread? Since you appear to be incapable of reading what I write, and, through your own frustration at your own lack of comprehension, always turn to abuse, I think that I'll decline your 'trade', since I would be trading my valuable discussion for your childish taunts. The only person on this borad that believes that this is the reason you refuse to answer my question is you (and I doubt you even believe it)I asked a straight question, putting a scenario that was basd on your crack pot idea of voting on every scientific theory, it was not abusive, it did not have reference to your previous replies to similar questions (because you haven't ever replied to a similar question).therefore my ability to understand what you write is irrelevant. You as usual resort to your elitist sterotyping of anyone who doesn't agree with your cockamamie ideas.So FOR ONCE, stop avoiding a straight question and explain to us all how the practical application of your proposal would work,
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.