thought for the day... again... capitalism? dying? dead?

[Guest]

with a sense of humour... what else are we supposed to do?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/sep/25/charlie-brooker-capitalism-and-shreddies

[eFestivals]

what else are we supposed to do?

hold the people responsible to account?

I know that's a rather original idea to those who are guilty of this cock-up and who are still running things, but hey, it's not an unreasonable thought I don't think.

What makes me sadly laugh is that the people who didn't know what we were doing to get us here are the same ones now saying how to get out of it - by printing more money which can only be spent on the debts that we already know are excessive. It's laughable, and only pouts off the day of reckoning to another time. It solves nothing.

The real cause? A bullshit system which was designed not to sensibly manage economics, but which was designed to try and make that 'evil' called communism look financially incompetent. Ultimately the growth that can be got and sustained by either take on things is the same: after all, growth is the result of production, not from fiddling the figures.

[worm]

On its arse. New economies are emerging based upon new resources. International order is crumbling. A dichotomy of local and global economics will soon be matched to cultural habits and demands that defy capitalism. The west are the last to feel the changes.

[eFestivals]

A dichotomy of local and global economics will soon be matched to cultural habits and demands that defy capitalism.

So you think that those with power will pass up their power and give it willingly to all others?

Yeah right. PMSL.

[The Nal]

On its arse. New economies are emerging based upon new resources. International order is crumbling. A dichotomy of local and global economics will soon be matched to cultural habits and demands that defy capitalism. The west are the last to feel the changes.

Edited September 26, 2011 by The Nal

[eFestivals]

isn't capitalism based on the concept that there needs to be economies/countries that are 'available' to be exploited? As the exploited rapidly become just more exploiters, then the system ends up eating itself?

nope - it needs more than just that, it also needs a perception of growth. Without growth (or at least, the illusion of growth) capitalism cannot sustain itself, which is why those economists are freaking out so much right now, becaused it's looking as tho the whole world could be entering a no-growth or negative growth period.

Without that growth, money becomes valueless. Because who will make any investment if it is guaranteed a negative return?

Even existing 'guaranteed' investments with a fixed rate return (such as bonds of all types) become worth less than their face value, because just as a mortgage holder with no job is unable to service their mortgage debt, any country or business with shrinking income becomes unlikely to be able to service their debts (because those debts have been taken on with the expectation of having the growth to enable them to be paid off).

But such things are what needs to happen - we have fake wealth that doesn't have the value of the money it's supposedly worth behind it, and until this comes back into synch the world's economy will remain fucked. The rich will have to see their wealth proportionately shrink hugely to regain that equilibrium, and the manipulation they're trying to use as cover until growth returns (if it returns!) is unlikely to work because people are expecting faster returns than they'll get in reality.

[eFestivals]

PS: the plan until now has to try and inflate our way out of debt to falsely re-create the economic equilibrium that's needed, but that's starting to come crumbling down because the middle classes aren't falling for it - they've become too scared to spend because they've seen what's happened with their pensions.

[abdoujaparov]

There is an inherent contradiction in capitalism, which most capitalists just ignore. Unlimited economic growth requires unlimited natural resources. Natural resources are, however, finite. Any economic system built on the fiction that it is possible to increase output and consumption ad infinitum is doomed to implode

[worm]

So you think that those with power will pass up their power and give it willingly to all others?

[The Nal]

isn't capitalism based on the concept that there needs to be economies/countries that are 'available' to be exploited? As the exploited rapidly become just more exploiters, then the system ends up eating itself?

which seems to be what's happening now

[worm]

The West are the ones who are going to take over these emerging economies and markets..

Edited September 26, 2011 by worm

[5co77ie]

I do like this (it's probably already been posted)

http://libcom.org/library/who-blame-anselm-jappe

But what if financialization, far from having ruined the real economy, has helped it to survive past its expiration date? What if it has breathed some life into a moribund body? Why are we so sure that capitalism is exempt from the cycle of birth, growth and death? May it not contain intrinsic limits to its development, limits that do not reside solely in the existence of a declared enemy (the proletariat, oppressed peoples), or in the exhaustion of natural resources?

[eFestivals]

There is an inherent contradiction in capitalism, which most capitalists just ignore. Unlimited economic growth requires unlimited natural resources. Natural resources are, however, finite. Any economic system built on the fiction that it is possible to increase output and consumption ad infinitum is doomed to implode

spot on, and recognised as that by Marx - who got his endgame for capitalism right, tho not the timing for it.

[eFestivals]

Those with the power of production are the consumers. This hasn't changed. Those with the power of ideology are the consumers. This has changed dramatically. If you want it in simple Marxist terms........

yep, its consumers who in theory hold that power - but it's a power they can only exercise if they band together.

And the simple fact is, to date, they'd far rather get something for themselves on the cheap and fuck the consequences than band together for the common good. For example, this country could have full employment if we all 'bought British', but fuck paying over the odds, give me that cheap shite from China. And so that power is passed on to the rich, who won't give it up voluntarily.

There will be a point at some time long in the future where necessity and not any 'power of ideology' will perhaps bring about a change, but it's without doubt long in the future. All the while that a significant enough number of people can gain power over others via exploitation there'll continue to be that exploitation - and with a huge part of the world considered 'undeveloped', there's still ample opportunity for people to develop the power of exploitation.

[worm]

spot on, and recognised as that by Marx - who got his endgame for capitalism right, tho not the timing for it.

[The Nal]

I don't think the west will be homogenous enough. Nations are held together by property and land, yet companies are becoming increasingly multi and intra national. So all you've got left are regions being used as part of a fulfilment to global demand, which means an obligation to local communities whose voices are creating a global ideology that is affecting consumption. Major reconstruction afoot, if you ask me, which you didn't.

[worm]

And the simple fact is, to date, they'd far rather get something for themselves on the cheap and fuck the consequences than band together for the common good.

[eFestivals]

However, the US in in the hole to the tune of $135 trillion vs about $75 trillion of total assets. So, if the entire country was liquidated, there would still be a deficit of $60 trillion!! Works out at about £195k per person in America. Its a unique economical state they're in.

Not that unique - which is the problem.

The situation that exists in the USA where they are technically bankrupt exists in the same or similar ways most of the rest of the economically developed world.

With more money floating around than there are assets - by a very long way - then money is has lost it's meaningful value and so people only spend it on what they consider to be necessities. There's no point in making investments because it's a loser.

[worm]

I didn’t but I welcome the point.

I know what you mean, and I hope you’re right. I just fear that the faceless global conglomerates already have a solid footing and have too much power with regard to the promise of providing stable employment and infrastructure, (as false as those promises may be) to be non influential when push comes to shove.

Edited September 26, 2011 by worm

[Purple Monkey]

Think the Zeitgeist movement explains pretty well how mechanisation of all labour is inevitable - except under the current monetary system it will eventually lead to collapse as unemployment increases. Under a different system it may be fine, but under the current one we have a date with disaster.

I have no doubt that capitalism is over. It's been a ticking time bomb and only now are people noticing and really paying attention to how short the fuse has become.

Watch this - it outlines the inherent flaws with the monetary system:

http://v17.lscache3.googlevideo.com/videoplayback?id=5b4ec92948bae0b3&itag=7&begin=0&ratebypass=yes&title=Zeitgeist:+Addendum&ip=0.0.0.0&ipbits=0&expire=1317130381&sparams=ip,ipbits,expire,id,itag,ratebypass,title&signature=075D94C30A708829AC2240E2B8A262BBEEB6A060.734FD1946F044CDCB8B3385A034009E1D3F97B4C&key=ck1

Edited September 27, 2011 by Purple Monkey

[eFestivals]

Apparently, today Ed Milliband is going to make a speech where he nails the heart of the current economic problems ... the only problem is that as has been happening for the last 30 years, people won't want to hear it.

And yet if we go back to then, there were a not-insignificant number of economists who saw where it would lead - but because people didn't want to hear it, those economists were either marginalised or they learnt to keep their mouths shut.

Those are the economists we need to have leading things now - but they're still marginalised, and those who were wearing the emperor's clothes are still pretending that's what happened is nothing to do with them and couldn't have been predicted, and they're still holding power.

[eFestivals]

I've gotta say that I don't have too much different a view to him - that the collapse is coming and that govts can't sort it out, and that millions of people will lose their savings. And just as he says, they'll also be some people who will make vast amounts of money out of everyone else's misery.

What we've gotta keep our fingers firmly crossed about is that war won't be the the outcome of all this as it was the last time around. But I have difficulty seeing it as anything but inevitable, because there's far more of a scramble for the world's resources now than there was in the 1930s, and with greater individualism within society there's now many more people whose greed will overtake all sense.

Whatever happens, it's defo going to be 6+ years before everything has settled down again in the UK.

Edited September 27, 2011 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

we could start with him and his like

with my limited knowledge, I just know the world would be a better place without hedge fund trading

yup, speculators of all kinds. They only take, they give nothing.

There needs to be some sort of mechanism whereby a company or organisation receives a smallish percentage (say in the range of 2% to 5%) of any trade in their shares or bonds (apart from with new share or bond issues), etc. This would help limit the damage that speculative 'down bet' share trading can do to any organisation, while also make 'up bet' trades actually about investing in a company to a small amount rather than soley about investing in a personal profit.

[abdoujaparov]

It would also be better without white socks.... but what you going to do about it ?

Play the game or get played...

[abdoujaparov]

I would be very surprised if you have nothing to do with it... Its almost impossible to avoid...