Alan Kerr

September 11, 2017 at 7:03 am #128305

Anonymous

Guest

Alan Kerr wrote:

@Steve-SanFrancisco@Michel Luc Bellemare Steve, Today Crusoe needs to know how to share total labour between getting (1) means to work–wood to build shelter (2) means to subsist–food to eat today. It is Crusoe who knows to change way to share his total labour-time in a different way each day to stay alive. Can you show that Crusoe has this wrong? Can you show that Crusoe should see what is going on with trees when he stops looking at the forest as a whole? Can you argue that Crusoe should focus just on 1 and forget 2 or vice versa? How would that work out in practice? How then could Crusoe stay alive? You should explain that for us. That is if you are right about the market. When you explain how this can work with Crusoe. Then and only then can anyone take your argument seriously about the market. Michel Luc Bellemare can see this and so he has given up his argument I think. With you the penny has not yet dropped. The penny is about to drop we hope. And if your argument cannot make sense on Crusoe’s island then it cannot make sense anywhere. Then that is the end of your augment. Then the market is working. Then commodities do still tend to sell at price of production.

I don't know much about crusoe, but I suspect it doesn't involve advertising agencies or bottled water sales or coordinating with strangers across vast distances speaking different languages to organize mega projects. You can decide how crusoe devides whatever he wants to devide. I'm critiqueing real world capitalism as it currently exist in fully developed american markets. I'm not really sure of all the economic flows in the real world but It's pretty clear they don't match waht crusoe would expect. Crusoe seems to have his own little private island economy and I think he's pretty lucky for it and hope it lasts for him as long as possible before modern multinational capital decides to turn his island into a rubber plantation. but you might consider this connundrum. . . Marx postulated his theory of labor value on the economics as he saw it, but he also postulated that capitalism contained the seeds of it's own destruction. does he postulate what the theory of labor value would look like in an economy where the seeds of capitalism's destruction are more than just seeds and have grown to become economic sectors and major parts of the economy? Maybe if the theory of Labor value and Marx and automation seem to break the paradigm, it's because of the reasons marx said that the paradigm would break? ps. what about the marvin islands? how about john gaults island? Does john gault island work any different than crusoes? I've been told repeatedly that "socialist island" doesn't exist and has never been tried? seems silly not to try it with so many islands.