ALB
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
“All “socialists” who support a Land Tax scheme have this in common—they aim to leave wage labour and hence the capitalist mode of production in existence, while bluffing themselves and others that if Ground Rent were transformed into a State Tax all the abuses of capitalist production would disappear.”
Say that again, Karl! The same applies to other single reform reformists such as Gesell.
Meanwhile here’s what Keynes said about Gesell. Good point at the end that, if ordinary money lost value if not spent in time, substitutes would be found, but what’s the point anyway?
“Together, George and Gesell show us how the mechanics of wealth extraction occur in capitalism, apart from the conventional idea of exploitation of labor.”
I don’t think either of them accepted the “conventional”, presumably Marxian (but also obvious), “idea of exploitation” that those who work for wages are exploited by those who own the places where they work since the only source of new wealth is work.
Henry George was all for free-market capitalism and held that it had a single flaw — the private expropriation of the increased value of land caused by expanding towns and cities — and so proposed a single solution: his single tax on land values. With that reform he thought capitalism would operate to benefit workers.
Silvio Gesell was essentially a currency reformer. He wasn’t proposing something stupid based on misunderstanding the economics of capitalism like Major Douglas and Social Credit. His basic idea was to issue money whose value declined over time as a means of encouraging people to spend during a slump as a way of trying to get out of it. Keynes gave him a favourable mention for this. It could be implemented without making things worse (as Social Credit would) but whether it would have the desired effect is another matter.
Actually, it is in effect being implemented by governments everywhere as they have a policy of inflating the currency by about 2 percent a year — which results in the value of the money unit depreciating over time. Just like Gesell wanted. And what difference has that made to the problems workers face under capitalism?
So neither George nor Gesell have anything useful to propose. Socialists have no reason to change their view that the way-out is to get rid of capitalism altogether and make the productive resources of society the common ownership of society so that they can be used to produce directly for use and not for profit and the principle of “from each according to their ability, to each according to their needs” can be implemented.
End capitalism not try to mend it.
It was obvious that the new government’s attempt to defy the economic laws of capitalism was going to end in failure, probably a spectacular one — there was no chance that the economy would grow by 2.5 percent a year just because the government decreed it — but this seems to be coming more quickly than expected:
Yes, a new depth for them. They are completely bankrupt and worse. What a despicable, unprincipled gang of self-seeking opportunists they are.
That won’t stop trots and other leftwingers (Lynch, Ward, Graham and other left trade union leaders) calling on workers to vote for them at the next election.
As the song says, jokers to the right, clowns to the left. I know saying this encourages people to be anti-politician and even anti-politics but it’s true.
Well, at least they recognise that “to grow the economy” you need more workers to produce the extra wealth. After all, how else can extra wealth be produced except by work and who else can do that except for workers?
I don’t think Putin is a communist;
https://tass.com/politics/1512727
I wonder whose side the christians’ god is in.
Before we can settle this we need to know which is the oldest political party in Britain. Is it the Conservatives or the Liberals?
If the Liberals are to be excluded because they merged with the SPD to become the Liberal Democrats, why aren’t the Conservatives ruled out because at some point they merged with the Liberal Unionists to become the Conservative and Unionist Party?
We might end up being the oldest political party in Britain!
Just found this from the Wikipedia entry on the Conservative Party:
“The Conservative Party was founded in 1834 from the Tory Party and was one of two dominant political parties in the 19th century, along with the Liberal Party. Under Benjamin Disraeli, it played a preeminent role in politics at the height of the British Empire. In 1912, the Liberal Unionist Party merged with the party to form the Conservative and Unionist Party.”
It is also increasing the prices of imported goods that workers consume. In the olden days, when currencies were tied to the dollar and the dollar to a fixed price of gold, there were formal devaluations which were a big drama. Since 1971 currencies have floated up and down against each other. Currencies have still “devalued” but gradually rather than as a single event. This is what is happening now to the pound. But the effect will be the same.
Here’s a reminder of what happened to the Wilson Labour government in the 1960d:
https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/cabinet-office-100/the-1967-devaluation-of-the-pound/
I just thought of that too. The old Liberal Party no longer exists. So the oldest extant political party would be Conservative Party with us as the second?
Strictly speaking it can’t be right as it implies that there are other socialist journals in Britain. But there aren’t any! The Socialist Standard is — of course ! — the only socialist journal in Britain. Isn’t it?
You are right. It does say that on that Facebook page. It needs to be changed and will be if and when we can track down who manages that page.
It is not our main Faebook page which is here (with many more followrers — 4.6K as opposed to 929)
Good point. I don’t think we have ever claimed to be the second oldest political party in Britain, only to have been formed before the Labour Party.
In other words, this thread seems to have started off on a false assumption. Or, Mullrae, have you evidence that we have made this claim?
This article sounds as if it might be of interest to those still following this thread:
Some Historical Background for an Economic Interpretation of the War in Ukraine
I can get Sputnik on my phone but not my laptop.
