Globalization
POSTED BY: deepgirl187
UPDATED: Tuesday, August 26, 2025 22:20
VIEWED: 9221
PAGE 11 of 15
Quote:Er, I don't think so. That's the innovation of foreign exchange market... floating currencies... whatever you want to call it. Capitalism existed before floating currencies. The real innovation of capitalism is the exchange value of labor.
The "innovation" of capitalism is the idea that money is a commodity that can be "bought, sold and traded" like any other material.
---------------------------------
Always look upstream.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:Quote:Er, I don't think so. That's the innovation of foreign exchange market... floating currencies... whatever you want to call it. Capitalism existed before floating currencies. The real innovation of capitalism is the exchange value of labor.
The "innovation" of capitalism is the idea that money is a commodity that can be "bought, sold and traded" like any other material.
---------------------------------
Always look upstream.
Noooo
I don't mean foreign exchange, I'm talking about money as a commodity. For example when you buy/sell shares you are effectively buying and selling value (which is ultimately money,) you can buy and sell debts, money itself has become a commodity to be used in industry just like basic materials. By extention that also covers labour because in effect with commoditised money you also get commoditised labour.
Edited to add
--------------
What Smith describes can be thought of as "proto-capitalism." Manufactories had existed in Europe for a long time, trademen and artisans had always hired workmen and apprentices so the idea that someone could buy labour and then sell the product of anothers work wasn't new. However, if for example you invested in a clockmaker, you became a partner in his business and the only way you could get your money out of the business would be if he bought you out. The idea that you could sell on that investment to someone else, that the wealth was a transferable instrument is the innovation that modern capitalism has that previous economic systems didn't. The idea that you can have secondary and speculative trade in that value is the root cause of a lot of the problems.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Okay, I understand. Basically, the ability to express everything as "exchange value".
And is indeed a root cause of a lot of problems.
---------------------------------
Always look upstream.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Now that we're past the guys in twirly mustaches and that you're feeling better (I hope) I'd like to try some more theoretical discussion. I'm not so terribly interested in what do you call something as in what's really happening. Let me give you a f'rinstance:
Production that is not- or cannot- be automatically turned around into consumption could be called "profit". It could also be called "savings". OR "accumulation". It's not so much an issue THAT it occurs but what is done with it afterwards.
---------------------------------
Always look upstream.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
Now that we're past the guys in twirly mustaches and that you're feeling better (I hope) I'd like to try some more theoretical discussion. I'm not so terribly interested in what do you call something as in what's really happening. Let me give you a f'rinstance:
Production that is not- or cannot- be automatically turned around into consumption could be called "profit". It could also be called "savings". OR "accumulation". It's not so much an issue THAT it occurs but what is done with it afterwards.
.
Ok to keep it simple
profit == income and/or investment
salary == income and/or investment
savings == investment.
Unless you keep money in a shoebox or in your matress this remains true. So the Siggy "Profit is EVIL because it removes value from the system" is rubbish. It was rubbish before and still is.
My advice to you is DONT simplify because every example where you do you mess things up.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Yes but- no.
It's true that money is never "lost", in the sense that it's always in "the system" somewhere. But there are two variables that aren't described by simply saying that money flows everywhere:
1) The rate of exchange. It makes a difference whether that dollar bill is exchanged once a day or once a year.
2) What that dollar bill is used for.
---------------------------------
Always look upstream.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Kinda....
For the sake of argument lets assume you give out two lots of $10,000, one as a single amount of $10,000 to a rich guy and you give 100 poor people $100 each. The rich guy doesnt really need $10,000 so he banks it or invests it. The 100 poor folks spend theirs straight away.
The result is that the poor people's $10,000 hits the economy faster, it buys stuff and generates immediate demand in the economy. If you happen to need a shot in the arm for demand this is good news because it's FAST. The rich guy's money is slower to have an effect and that effect is initially in investment and not in demand. If your aim is to boost investment then this is also a good option.
The net effect of putting $10,000 bucks into the economy is the same seen from the point of view of the economy in general because ultimately that money does get spent on something it is the short term effect that differs.
I think you believe that the invested money generates no demand at all, which is wrong. If you think about it the reason companies issue stock is to gain money to buy things if they were not expanding somehow they wouldn't need the money. So ultimately invested funds is spent on goods and services just the same as wages.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Well, if all we're talking about is the management of scarce resources, than no, it's not necessary. A feudalism or a communism or a slave economy have all proven to work to one degree or another. It's probably not a society that I want to live in, but it's certainly been done.
Originally posted by SignyM:
So what you're saying is that capitalism isn't necessary. Right?
Quote:Yes, I should be, and I am.
Originally posted by rue:
Good on you. You should be very proud of all you've accomplished.
Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.
Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.
-- Cicero
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Finn
You just admitted that you're proud to have exposed yourself to everyone here as a sleazebag, a liar and a hypocrite. Way to go, dooood.
***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
"Unless you keep money in a shoebox or in your mattress this remains true."
That does sometimes happen. I don't think they use shoeboxes or mattresses however.
I don't know if you remember about 15 years back when the value of the dollar went down, as did the stock market, gold, real estate, bonds and pretty much every avenue of investment, not just in the US but globally. That hung on for about 2 years. What was happening was that people didn't know where to invest their excess capital. So they hung onto it, in currency. Better to let it slowly erode than invest it and lose it all, I guess.
Anyway, b/c money wasn't 'circulating' it caused a global recession.
And that's the other thing about money. The circulation itself is an economy booster. So to accumulate it in few hands and circulate it slowly is an economic negative, whereas to circulate it more quickly is an economic positive. That make the end result of capitalism - the accumulation of wealth in the hands of a few and slower circulation - a negative feedback on the economy. One needs to counter that with economic policies otherwise you get the inevitable depression.
***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME