/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>7770533

Whoops, meant to post this guy.

>>7770570
>>7770533

the three fathers of modern economics

>>7770570

Which coin you think this nigga would be hodlin rn

>>7770863

gold

>>7770533
retarded kike

>>7770533
Never had a job had to live off his capitalist factory owner boyfriend Peter engles in their shared downtown Berlin apartment.

>>7770863
non because he was poor as shit and barely even had a job... he would probably be a pajeet nowadays

>>7770533
>economist

>>7770533
>From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs

the better question is how someone proven so wrong on everything is still the subject of angsty teen's admiration.

>>7770533
Go back to your /leftypol/ discord, nigger.

Sage.

>>7771519

but he hasn't been proven wrong

>>7770533
>Good economist, or best economist?

kikeroach piece of shit

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k2dbF7SK4KI

>>7771650
>because it was not really socialism!
It's easy never being wrong when your fans keep retreating from every failure

>>7771519
Because he is a well of excuses for people who are stupid, lazy and emotionally damaged, and more specifically those angsty teenagers who think in line with "Man this world sucks, fucking assholes controlling us, we should just work all together man".

>>7771711
>proving several philosophical positions wrong by pointing to failures of a given political entity
I'm sure reductivists like you loved to point out the failures of liberalism in the 18th century too.
>Hurr durr only faggots want democracy, french revolution proved that wrong a long time ago hurrr

He was absolutely retarded and his insane theories have been debunked a million times.

If you want a real economist look at this guy.

>>7771711

What does socialism have to do with his economic contributions? He barely even discusses socialism, especially in his prolific work. His largest contributions are to historical analysis of capitalism.

>>7770533
Better than pic related guy

>>7771891
marxism and socialism is slavery though
I'm glad the human race has moved on such a poisonous ideology.

>>7771955
>His largest contributions are to historical analysis of capitalism.
and history and countless economists after him have proven him wrong

his theories were insane metaphysics.
Modern marxists don't even accept human evolution or human instincts.

>>7771916
>this guy

kikeroach piece of shit

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RbgT4BrsNI4

>>7771955
His retarded ideas were proven wrong by this glorious man >>7771916
>muh LTV
kys

>>7770533

>>7772012
this video is retarded FUD

Enjoy being wrong
Fuck you and fuck central banking.

>>7772001

His writings were a rejection of metaphysical approaches to economics/politics for a historical approach based on the rational interest of participating groups/individuals... that really shines through on The German Ideology and The Poverty of Philosophy

> and history and countless economists after him have proven him wrong

How tho?

>>7772018

the "austrian school" explanation in that image is just a reiterance of the falling rate of profit, which is a marxist idea.

>>7771965
>t. never read marx

>>7772191
>the "austrian school" explanation in that image is just a reiterance of the falling rate of profit
no it's not, it's just explaining how economic growth raises real wages


>His writings were a rejection of metaphysical approaches to economics/politics
bullshit lol dialectical materialism is metaphysical garbage. It's pseudoscience to it's very core.
It assumes all human action is the result of economic forces, which is incredibly false.
>muh laws of history
lol

>How tho?
LTV debunked, muh "living standards for workers will constantly decrease to a subsistence level" debunked, DM debunked
If you are an ironic marxist after knowing about these things then you are probably retarded.

>>7772205
>t. never read marx and is a preteen that unironically wants to be enslaved

Marx actually wanted a central bank, you people are so incredibly stupid lol
enjoy being enslaved and poor

>>7772337
We have central banks right now under capitalism; we have an organization called the World Bank. Are you sniffing glue?

>>7772400
He was no different than Porkie kikes

>>7772400
>We have central banks right now under capitalism
Capitalism is an extremely vague and useless terms.
According to your retarded definition, the most economically unfree shitholes on earth are still "capitalism".

What matters is economic freedom vs economic slavery or free market vs unfree markets.

Central banks are a function of UNFREE markets, all which MARX wanted.
Fuck off with your shit language.

>we have an organization called the World Bank
Yes, all government control over the market.
Unfree markets.
All things which marxists more or less want.

You are saying, retard?

>>7772446
>Porkie
hi leftypol trash

>>7772307
> no it's not, it's just explaining how economic growth raises real wages


Thats what the falling rate of profit is... The ratio of profit/wages decreases, which increases the purchasing power of wage earners.

> It assumes all human action is the result of economic forces, which is incredibly false.

What does this even mean? What's an "economic" force here? What's not an economic force?

> muh "living standards for workers will constantly decrease to a subsistence level"

this is literally the opposite of what marx thought

> LTV debunked

LTV isn't "debunked", its completely compatible with the ideas that tried to 'replace' it (e.g., marginal value) and the synthesis of the two is the basis for contemporary, neoclassical economics.

t. Marshall's scissors

>>7772018
Where's Feder

>>7772494
>muh free market
ah, the true idealism rears it's ugly head

What about Volks Economie?

>>7772497
>Thats what the falling rate of profit is... The ratio of profit/wages decreases, which increases the purchasing power of wage earners.
LOL That's not what the section in that image was saying AT ALL though.
Mises and austrians never said profits would fall, only that prices in general would fall.

>What does this even mean?
You want me to explain your own ideology to you?
I don't know how I can make it more clear.
>What's an "economic" force here?
The forces of feudalism, capitalism, socialism etc.
>this is literally the opposite of what marx thought
Wrong, he said that living standards for workers would constantly fall and this would lead to capitalism going into crises and the workers revolting. He said this was inevitable.
You people ALWAYS lie about what you believe, talk to 100 marxists and they will always tell you contradictory things about their ideology.
>LTV isn't "debunked"
It was debunked ages ago by bomh bawerk and others
then you faggots started talking about useless things like use value vs exchange value
>its completely compatible with the ideas that tried to 'replace' it (e.g., marginal value) and the synthesis of the two is the basis for contemporary, neoclassical economics.
No, they contradict each other.

Capitalism is fucking cancer and will beset the death of mankind

The wealthiest 100 people could lift the poorest billion out of poverty. A billion starving human beings. But wealth redistribution is immoral.

Get a fucking grip you scum.

>>7770533
neither

>>7770533

this nigga couldn't even feed his family yet had the balls to tell people about workers

>>7770533

marx was badass neet genius,

from appendix to manifesto:
Demands of the Communist Party in Germany “Workers of all countries, unite!”

10. A state bank, whose paper issues are legal tender, shall replace all private banks. This measure will make it possible to regulate the credit system in the interest of the people as a whole, and will thus undermine the dominion of the big financial magnates. Further, by gradually substituting paper money for gold and silver coin, the universal means of exchange (that indispensable prerequisite of bourgeois trade and commerce) will be cheapened, and gold and silver will be set free for use in foreign trade. Finally, this measure is necessary in order to bind the interests of the conservative bourgeoisie to the Government.

>>7772582
>muh capitalism
>muh socialism
>muh I don't need to use clear descriptive language when describing things
ah, the true idealism rears it's ugly head

>>7772647
>Capitalism is fucking cancer and will beset the death of mankind
>The wealthiest 100 people could lift the poorest billion out of poverty. A billion starving human beings. But wealth redistribution is immoral.
>Get a fucking grip you scum.
HOLY FUCK ARE YOU PEOPLE EVER STUPID
If you took the wealth from the top 100 richest people and gave it to the poor it would only cause massive inflation because the top 100 richest people consume extremely tiny amounts of consumer goods compared with the rest of the world.

It would amount to virtually nothing.
You're an idiot.

>>7772205

>Marx
>Capitalism is evil, some people have more than others
>let's make it so nobody has anything and we are all miserable together
>problem solved

>>7772647
t. fake internet money enthusiast

>>7772685
>10. A state bank, whose paper issues are legal tender, shall replace all private banks. This measure will make it possible to regulate the credit system in the interest of the people as a whole, and will thus undermine the dominion of the big financial magnates. Further, by gradually substituting paper money for gold and silver coin, the universal means of exchange (that indispensable prerequisite of bourgeois trade and commerce) will be cheapened, and gold and silver will be set free for use in foreign trade. Finally, this measure is necessary in order to bind the interests of the conservative bourgeoisie to the Government.
Holy shit he was so fucking evil lmao

He literally wanted the state to enslave the population through central banking.

>>7772645
> LOL That's not what the section in that image was saying AT ALL though. Mises and austrians never said profits would fall, only that prices in general would fall.

As usual, they only paint half of the picture.

> The forces of feudalism, capitalism, socialism etc.

Sure. Can you give an example of something that is 'outside of those forces', i.e., "not economic"?

> Wrong, he said that living standards for workers would constantly fall and this would lead to capitalism going into crises and the workers revolting. He said this was inevitable.
You people ALWAYS lie about what you believe, talk to 100 marxists and they will always tell you contradictory things about their ideology.

How about you quote him, then?

> It was debunked ages ago by bomh bawerk and others

it wasn't tho. Subjective value theories are perfectly compatible with LTV since LTV is looking at the price of commodities when demand and supply are at equilibrium. Subjective theories of value are looking at how changes in supply and demand impact price.

>communism is stateless guys
>we just need to create the most authoritarian state in human history to socially engineer people to be anarchists and then the state will magically wither away

If you are stupid enough to believe this, you deserve to be poor and enslaved.

>>7770533

>>7772791

clearly an authoritarian state isn't necessary, as communism exists right not in autonomous regions like Rojava and Chiapas :3

> you deserve to be poor

I'm worth 50 btc

>>7770533
>>7770570
>>7770625

Y'all be excused

>>7772725
using the term "free market" like it could exist in the real world any more than "true communism" could is laughably naive. You people have the exact same argument pattern as tankies, have you realized that? All problems in capitalist countries boil down to the maxim "it wasn't true capitalism". fucking kek'd mate.

>>7772779
>As usual, they only paint half of the picture.
But the "other half of the picture" is wrong.

>Sure. Can you give an example of something that is 'outside of those forces', i.e., "not economic"?
Human biological instincts and brain science. Marxists deny these when they are the most important in terms of human behavior.

>How about you quote him, then?
Are you saying that marx never predicted that living standards for workers will fall and this will lead to a socialist revolution?
Marxists all over the internet say this.
If he never said this then why would socialism/communism EVER happen?

>it wasn't tho.
Yes, just ignore the fact that both sides of this debate constantly argue with each other and think the other side is retarded.

kys fencesitter.

>>7772893
>Rojava and Chiapas
Literally who?

Also you are unable to defend marxists stupid goal of an authoritarian state which would create an anarchist one.
It makes no sense and you know it, bootlicker.

>I'm worth 50 btc
No you're not lmao

>>7771916
This is the correct answer.

>>7772933
>using the term "free market" like it could exist in the real world
Free markets have existed in countless places in history to varying degrees. USA during the late 1800s which no central banks would be pretty close to a free market. Sweden and Switzerland during the 1800s would be another example.
Calling economically unfree shitholes "capitalism" because you can't come up with an actual argument and must use sloppy nonsense language just makes you a retard.

How fucking stupid are you?

>You people have the exact same argument pattern as tankies
But we don't, you ideological and braindead marxist.

>All problems in capitalist countries boil down to the maxim "it wasn't true capitalism"
KEK but these are clear examples when YOUR SYSTEM ie. government interventionism in the market has failed and you're trying to pass the blame on us.
Don't get so asspained when we call you out on your bullshit.

Using the socialism/capitalism false dichotomy makes no sense.

>>7771650
>I WANT AN IPHONE!

It's so amazing to me that there are unironic marxists still around.

How the fuck is this shit even possible.
The religion of marxism makes no fucking sense at all and denies human biological instincts and neuroscience.

They actually want an authoritarian state to socially engineer people to become communists.
They don't even accept human nature and get asspained when you bring it up.

>>7773025
> But the "other half of the picture" is wrong.

The purchasing power of wages can't go up unless the purchasing power of profits go down... wage earners can make more than they did without profits dropping, but all that would mean is a reduction in purchasing power.

But regardless, of whether you actually understand the implication of shifting purchasing power in wages, the conclusion reached, which is whats actually explored in that image, is identical to the conclusion reached by austrians.

> Human biological instincts and brain science. Marxists deny these when they are the most important in terms of human behavior.

It's human biological drives which direct them towards economic goals. Marxists aren't denying that.

> Are you saying that marx never predicted that living standards for workers will fall and this will lead to a socialist revolution?

Yes.

> Marxists all over the internet say this.

If you actually read the texts rather than just arguing with brainlets on the Internet then you'd know that they're idiots.

> If he never said this then why would socialism/communism EVER happen?

Because Marx also pointed out contradictions of capitalist production which make it unsustainable. The falling rate of profit plays into this, as it requires equity holders to constantly expand the rate of the use of resources in a system with limited resources.

> Yes, just ignore the fact that both sides of this debate constantly argue with each other and think the other side is retarded.

One side argues that the other side is wrong. The other side argues that the former isn't actually introducing contradictory ideas. The latter side is composed of both all left wing and orthodox economists.

>>7772933
A free market exists if i sell you a lawnmower for something, cash or otherwise.
A free market exists when a pot dealer sells a high schooler some pot.
A free market exists when i have you come out to my ponds and trap the goddamn beavers fucking my shit up and then pay you with litecoin. Yeah my beav trapper accepts litecoin.

>>7773054
> No you're not lmao

you've fallen for my trap card

What message do you want me to sign with my eth trezor wallet?

>>7773160
Are you even replying to me? I never tried to pass any blame for socialism on to capitalism you mong. I'm not so retarded as some people to argue Stalin wasn't a commie. You're arguing against you're straw commie that you built up in your head; this is pure animus. My point is that the free market is a meme, and you cherry picking trite examples is literally what >>7772893 did. see how the patterns of argument line up here too? Even Fukuyama isn't a Fukuyamist man; you haven't figured out the recipe for utopia. If you really think that you did, you might as well be a dialectical materialist.

>>7773054
fuck it

{
"address": "0xa8b9f65c9d089ad947ac1b654cb43053d6480370",
"msg": "0oJ8tQM5 who created /biz/ post No.7773054 on 02/18/18(Sun)18:38:53 is a brainlet",
"sig": "0x0b16ec36776ac3193cf4dfdce79760dba1eaa4a002af2e987573e59ef44a4d276919d1880627498204626a6b6032a2b9bc3c9af5b4f3ac084a61099d139684291c",
"version": "2"
}

>>7773274
>The purchasing power of wages can't go up unless the purchasing power of profits go down
This is wrong.
As mass production increases it causes the prices of goods and services to go down thus real wages increase.
If all of the capitalists gave all of the profits to the workers instead of themselves, real wages for workers would stay exactly the same because no new resources have been produced.
>which is whats actually explored in that image, is identical to the conclusion reached by austrians.
Wrong.
>It's human biological drives which direct them towards economic goals. Marxists aren't denying that.
Yes, marxist manchildren ARE denying this.
Marxists believe that the economic system of the time is what drives human beings to action and that neuroscience and human instincts have nothing to do with this.
This is exactly why marx wanted an incredibly authoritarian socialist state to "socially engineer" people to become communists.
If he and marxists understood that this was IMPOSSIBLE thanks to human instincts then marx and marxists wouldn't believe in it.
Idiot. Stop lying.
Also "human biological drives which direct them towards economic goals"
This is precisely what mises believed in praxeology, not marx.

>If you actually read the texts rather than just arguing with brainlets on the Internet then you'd know that they're idiots.
>all internet marxists are IDIOTS except for ME, I'm the real true marxist.
Hilarious.
>contradictions of capitalist
Don't exist.

>The falling rate of profit plays into this.... of resources in a system with limited resources.
Businesses don't have to constantly expand anything. If they can only make profit on the same renewable resources then that's what they will have to do.
>in a system with limited resources.
This is true for ANY system though, this is solved by asteroid mining and advanced recycling.

>actually introducing contradictory ideas
wrong, they argue the other side is wrong

reminder to sage and hide all leftpol threads

>>7773306
Marxists don't like crypto.
If you do, then you are a traitor to your comrades.

>>7773475
>I never tried to pass any blame for socialism on to capitalism you mong.
This is exactly what calling modern economies like USA or Germany "capitalist" when they fail does.

>My point is that the free market is a meme
But it's not.
It has existed many times in history and of course we don't have free markets now but different countries have different degrees of economic freedom.
The ones which are lacking in economic freedom tend to be absolute shitholes.

You're wrong and are an ideological marxist brainlet.

>>7772001
meanwhile automation is going to kill capitalism in the next 15 years
btw did you know that being able to eat cooked meat is one of the reason our brains are so big?

Remember when Bohm Bawerk absolutely destroyed Marx?

>>7772893
>I'm worth 50 btc

You don't need 50 btc. Your wealth needs to be divided among the poor. :^)

>>7773508
>>7773025

>muh biology and neuroscience
don't talk about things which you know nothing about. The most accomplished evolutionary psychologists and neuroscientists will tell you this is a bullshit argument meant to be dismissive. Human culture is very malleable, hence why the pre frontal cortex does not finish developing until age 25. There are many instances of egalitarian societies amid primate species that are more successful than their counterparts. Success defined as the collective well being of each individual.

>>7773618
>meanwhile automation is going to kill capitalism in the next 15 years
TOP LUL
I love when leftists say this and think they're intelligent or something.
Living standards have gone down the past 40 or so years because of central banking destroying any gains in real economic productivity. This isn't the fault of automation.

We're not even CLOSE to fully automating SHIT right now.
Automation is a good thing in a free market with no central bank, prices go down for consumers and less people have to work.
More jobs are created because less people are working and the price of capital decreases.
You people said the same thing when cars replaced horse drawn carriages.

>btw did you know that being able to eat cooked meat is one of the reason our brains are so big?
Yes, marxists don't though.

>>7773508
> As mass production increases it causes the prices of goods and services to go down thus real wages increase

Which also decreases rate of profit.

You don't have to agree with that, though, to know that the image you posted was literally retarded.

> Marxists believe that the economic system of the time is what drives human beings to action and that neuroscience and human instincts have nothing to do with this.This is exactly why marx wanted an incredibly authoritarian socialist state to "socially engineer" people to become communists.

"we cannot here go either into the actual physical nature of man, or into the natural conditions in which man finds himself — geological, hydrographical, climatic and so on. The writing of history must always set out from these natural bases and their modification in the course of history through the action of men."

"Hunger is hunger, but the hunger gratified by cooked meat eaten with a knife and fork is a different hunger from that which bolts down raw meat with the aid of hand, nail, and tooth"

this is ultra low tier bait

> all internet marxists are IDIOTS except for ME, I'm the real true marxist.

I'm not even a marxist.

> If they can only make profit on the same renewable resources then that's what they will have to do.

Problem is that their rate of profit falls over time. Competing businesses which DO expand have lower marginal cost of production, which drives prices down. That means lower rate of profit per sale, unless you expand.

> wrong, they argue the other side is wrong

read kevin carson

>>7773693
>don't talk about things which you know nothing about.
Yet YOU don't know about these things you absolute brainlet.

>The most accomplished evolutionary psychologists and neuroscientists will tell you this is a bullshit argument
No they won't lol.
Anyone with a brain understands the human nature/human instincts arguments. It's only marxists that get butthurt when you point this out.

>Human culture is very malleable
The degree of malleability is limited though you fucking retard.
Only marxists think the human brain is a blank slate that can believe ANYTHING.

>There are many instances of egalitarian societies amid primate species that are more successful than their counterparts. Success defined as the collective well being of each individual.
Collectivist societies tend to be impoverished.
Individualist societies have much higher living standards.
You people legit want to be enslaved.

>>7773618
>automation is going to kill capitalism in the next 15 years

Lmao, we would need Skynet-level tech for that. We are no where need automating complicated manual tasks. If you think everything can be easily automated, you've clearly delusional.

>>7773544

I'm just in it for the money and the beauty of the math/technology.

"It doesn't take much time to {participate in capital investment], and, if you are willing to risk a little bit, you can grasp money away from your opponents." -Marx

Go verify the message I signed.

>>7773788
both hobbes and rousseau were wrong. The truth lies in the middle.

Why are all of the most brilliant scientists on the planet strongly left leaning? People far more intelligent than some shitposter on biz (you). Not an appeal to authority, simply a question.

>>7773777
>Which also decreases rate of profit.
Then why did Henry Ford make so much money while providing cheap cars for everyone?
Why does walmart make so much profit when they have the lowest prices.
You're falling apart here kid.

>"we cannot here go either into the actual physical nature of man, or into the natural conditions in which man finds himself — geological, hydrographical, climatic and so on. The writing of history must always set out from these natural bases and their modification in the course of history through the action of men."
It's hilarious that he wrote this and then contradicted himself with his other writings.
Marx was KNOWN for constantly contradicting himself.

>this is ultra low tier bait
Yet you're STILL wrong.
Explain why marx thought we should create an ultra authoritarian state to socially engineer people to be communist if you claim he believed in human instincts?
Explain this.

>I'm not even a marxist.
>I'm not even a marxist. I only defend his theories and glorify marxist cultures like Rojava and Chiapas
lel

>Problem is that their rate of profit falls over time.
But it doesn't. It's only seemed to increase.
>That means lower rate of profit per sale
But their real profits are worth more than before as they can buy more things with them. Just as real wages are worth more than before.
Problem?

>read kevin carson
Read mises and rothbard

>>7773777

Dude just stop, you argue as if you only read wikipedia articles.

>>7773788
>standard of living meme

why are you more likely to die of suicide in the US than of a car accident?

>>7771287
>Peter engles
LOL

You mean friedrich?

>>7773839
>I'm just in it for the money
Then you're not a very good marxist are you?

>"It doesn't take much time to {participate in capital investment], and, if you are willing to risk a little bit, you can grasp money away from your opponents." -Marx
Yet ANOTHER one of marx's contradictions.
You're really shooting yourself in the foot here.

>>7773884
>Why are all of the most brilliant scientists on the planet strongly left leaning?
Mainly because academia is state funded and thus going to be more left leaning.
Doesn't mean you're correct, just means that you people are the equivalent of the catholic church centuries ago.

>>7773884
Because they're isolated from reality. They only see social economic problems as abstractions.

>>7773980
>why are you more likely to die of suicide in the US
completely irreverent to anything we're talking about
nice strawman though,
you couldn't respond to anything in my post really lol

>>7773839

>>7772001
>prove
>economics

>>7774085
Economics is based on logic
>logic cannot be proven
lel

>>7774022
I really wasn't paying attention to the debate you're having.

I'm just here to tell you that capitalism is responsible for every major woe in society.

>>7770533
isnt that the guy that wants everything to be free and whites to die out because they are 'evil'?

>>7774130
>economics is based on logic
hahahahahahahah

>>7771965
Capitalism is also slavery

>>7774134
>I'm just here to tell you that capitalism is responsible for every major woe in society.
If it wasn't for "capitalism" you would make $300 a year and die at age 45.

Enjoy being horribly wrong and wanting to be enslaved and poor.

>>7773932
> Then why did Henry Ford make so much money while providing cheap cars for everyone?
> Why does walmart make so much profit when they have the lowest prices.

Because, as I pointed out in my previous post, their marginal cost is small due to their scale. I.e. massive expansion. This gives them a huge advantage over potential, smaller competitors.

> Read mises and rothbard

I have read Mises and Rothbard. Early on Rothbard actually had some interestingly left wing things to say, and he actually leaves the door wide open for left wing analysis even in his later work:

"The only genuine refutation of the Marxian case for revolution, then, is that capitalists' property is just rather than unjust, and that therefore its seizure by workers or by anyone else would in itself be unjust and criminal. But this means that we must enter into the question of the justice of property claims, and it means further that we cannot get away with the easy luxury of trying to refute revolutionary claims by arbitrarily placing the mantle of "justice" upon any and all existing property titles. Such an act will scarcely convince people who believe that they or others are being grievously oppressed and permanently aggressed against. But this also means that we must be prepared to discover cases in the world where violent expropriation of existing property titles will be morally justified, because these titles are themselves unjust and criminal."

Mises doesn't really develop any critiques of Marx' economic ideas... he develops critiques of regimes that called themselves Marxist (correctly or incorrectly.) Those critiques, most notably the calculation problem, are perfectly valid. But they also work as critiques of centralization in capitalism too.

>>7774156
>freedom is alvery
AHAHAHAHA

>>7774151
>if we raise the minimum wage to 9999999 trillion dollars an hour then everyone would be super rich
>you can't prove me wrong because economics isn't based on logic and supply and demand doesn't exist
t. brainlet

>>7774156
>slavery
sure whatever but you can get out of it

>>7772494
did you know that in a free market (with complete informations, perfecty competitive and rational consumers) the profits are equal to zero? REALLY makes you think, didn't it?

>>7774183
>being forced to wage cuck for Henry shekelstein so you can pay the kike bank for the roof over your head and the kike supermarket owners for the food you eat is freedom
L
M
A
O

>>7773932


> Explain why marx thought we should create an ultra authoritarian state to socially engineer people to be communist if you claim he believed in human instincts?

How can I explain that, when he didn't?

> I'm not even a marxist. I only defend his theories and glorify marxist cultures like Rojava and Chiapas

The dude can be right about some things. Doesn't mean I worship him or agree with everything. I'm not a ricardean or 'smithean' either, and yet, no one would accuse me of being either for simply defending some of their ideas.

> But it doesn't. It's only seemed to increase.

Because production expands to counteract falling rates of profit

>>7773987

> Then you're not a very good marxist are you?

Like I said, I'm not a Marxist. Not that participating in the accumulation of capital would make someone a "bad marxist", whatever that means.

> Yet ANOTHER one of marx's contradictions.

> You can't both critique something and also use it to your advantage!!

>>7774183
>muh strawmen arguments lol see how right i am

>>7774180
>Because, as I pointed out in my previous post, their marginal cost is small due to their scale. I.e. massive expansion. This gives them a huge advantage over potential, smaller competitors.
Ever since then, profits for big companies like ford have only gone up.
I thought marx said they would decrease.
What happened marx?

Also respond to my criticism of real profits increasing because what you can buy with them are worth more.
Same with real wages.

>Mises doesn't really develop any critiques of Marx' economic ideas... he develops critiques of regimes that called themselves Marxist (correctly or incorrectly.)
>NOT REEEEAAALLL SOOCCCIIAALLLISSSMM
Every fucking time.
Do you know why EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THESE PLACES are "not real socialism"?
because socialism IS impossible and nonsensical

>But they also work as critiques of centralization in capitalism too.
No, they don't.

>>7774226
>being able to get out of cucking for Henry Shekelstein is slavery
>being kept down forever by the State is better
L
M
A
O

>>7774159
yes of course, because the acquisition of private property is the ONLY reason people have for innovating.

even if those 2 things were true, your argument is still shit. $300 a year is completely arbitrary without context. Dying at 45 is no better than dying at 70 when you're used to dying at 45. It's like being sad about the fact that you'll die at 70 when you know that someone in the future may potentially live to 200.

>>7774156
At least in capitalism I have a minute chance of getting a lambo and not starving to death or being shot because the commissar was having grumpy dumpies that day.

>>7774264
>Its possible to escape wage slavery
Thats why only 0.01% of the world has more than 10k in savings then?

>>7774286
>Dying at 45 is no better than dying at 70 when you're used to dying at 45.

Lmao, how can you "get used to dying"? Do people die more than once?

>>7774247
> Ever since then, profits for big companies like ford have only gone up.
> I thought marx said they would decrease.
> What happened marx?

I just told you, they expanded production to counteract falling rates of profit. The result is an increased centralization of control of production, which is where Mises critique comes into play.

> because socialism IS impossible and nonsensical

it exists in Rojava and Chiapas right now. Free market communisms :^)

>>7774220
>with complete informations, completely impossible perfecty competitive and rational consumers

NONE of these things are what a free market is.
All a free market means is there is an enforcement mechanism in place to protect life, liberty, private property, enforce contracts and prevent fraud.

Why do you make shitposts like this without even knowing the definitions of words?
Fuck off kike Joseph E. Stiglitz.
It's people like you that want to ban crypto.

>>7774247
> Also respond to my criticism of real profits increasing because what you can buy with them are worth more.

As in, profits can go up if you use them to purchase more capital to counteract the falling rate of profit?

>>7774226
>he actually thinks you take all of the money and profits from your boss and it will magically mean you will be able to buy more things
HOLY SHIT YOU'RE ACTUALLY THIS FUCKING DUMB

If you took this profits it would simply cause massive inflation because the working class consumes 99% of all consumer goods.

LOL BRAINLET
Enjoy sucking the cock of the state.

>>7774297
they're losers who never had an idea or will to change their way of life to try and succeed
if you live in a modern Western country you can break away from wage cucking
why do you think we're all on this board right now?
Most people don't cause they don't want to take risks and/or never think of anything worthwhile to be able to make them a success

>>7774331
>free market is regulation
What am I reading

>>7774311
When life expectancy is 45. Sloppy wording. You understood what I meant though and have no refutation, so you pick at shit like this

>>7774364

oh hes retarded, dont mind him

>>7774242
>How can I explain that, when he didn't?
He DID though, you liar.

Read the communist manifesto, he wanted socialism through statism. He though the state would wither away.

Read:
>Demands of the Communist Party in Germany “Workers of all countries, unite!”

>The dude can be right about some things.
He was wrong about almost everything though.

>Because production expands to counteract falling rates of profit
It was never falling to begin with. Companies that don't expand at all have the same level of profit.

>Like I said, I'm not a Marxist.
Nah, you're just a liar.

>> You can't both critique something and also use it to your advantage!!
Nah, it's just another one of his many contradictions.

>>7774359
I'd say most people here are only here because they are loser neets and desperate to earn money
Its like dropshipping on steroids
and crypto is the antithesis of modern economics, capitalist or socalist..

>>7774359
this is the most bluepilled spew I've seen all night. You're saying 99.9% of the population is comprised of losers who never had an idea or will to change their life?

What an incredibly naive worldview you have. Absolutely boggles my mind that people can be this stupid in 2018.

>>7774243
>>muh strawmen arguments lol see how right i am
How is it a strawman argument?
LOL you CAN'T prove me wrong.
Clearly economic arguments can be proven wrong using logic.
Fucking idiot.

>>7774286
>yes of course, because the acquisition of private property is the ONLY reason people have for innovating.
Who the fuck was talking about innovation?
Brainlet.

>$300 a year is completely arbitrary without context.
I meant like african tier 300 dollars a year.
Thats YOU without capitalism.

>>7774318
>I just told you, they expanded production to counteract falling rates of profit.
debunked in my other post

>it exists in Rojava and Chiapas
These places aren't socialist or communist lol.
Also they are extremely poor and nobody would ever want to live there lmao

>>7774419
either way, people are here risking money to try to make money. Whether they're dumbasses or not doesn't really make a difference.
crypto at the moment may as well be capitalist since normies and boomers think it's like stock
>>7774443
yes, most people are losers

>>7774348
>As in, profits can go up if you use them to purchase more capital to counteract the falling rate of profit?
No.
Are you this stupid?
If prices for goods decrease in the economy, your profits are worth more.
The rate of profit doesn't decrease.

>>7774453
that was your implication for 45 year life expectancy. What the fuck else would you have been talking about

>>7774364
>What am I reading
Holy shit you really DON'T know what a free market is.
The law protecting private property and enforcing contracts isn't a regulation on the free market. It IS the free market.
Holy fuck just kill yourself right now.


>>7774406
You're the one who's constantly getting btfo here.
You don't even KNOW what a free market is.
:^)

>>7774510
>that was your implication for 45 year life expectancy.
No, increases in economic production and freedom was more important than innovation.

>>7774417

> Read the communist manifesto, he wanted socialism through statism. He though the state would wither away.

Yeah, in that particular context, decades before publishing any of his prolific economic writing, he wrote a manifesto with a series of demands for the state. I don't think that's an effective strategy.

Its the part about social engineering people to be communist that's bullshit.

> It was never falling to begin with. Companies that don't expand at all have the same level of profit.

No they don't... read the ideas that you claim to agree with... companies that don't expand almost always have a higher marginal cost of production for commodities of the market price...

> Nah, you're just a liar.

You're the one who said I'm a bad Marxist.

> Nah, it's just another one of his many contradictions.

Why is that a contradiction though?

>>7774559
>Yeah, in that particular context
AHAHAHA
Yeah he only wanted state socialism for germany but the rest of the world he wanted stateless socialism.
Suuuurrrreee.

Yet ANOTHER one of his contractions lmao

>he wrote a manifesto with a series of demands for the state
Exactly.
Demands for the working class in order to create a socialist workers state.
>I don't think that's an effective strategy.
It's literally what marx wanted though.
We weren't talking about you.

>Its the part about social engineering people to be communist that's bullshit.
That was more leninism but 90% of marxists are leninists.

>You're the one who said I'm a bad Marxist.
You are a marxist though and that's the funny thing.

>>7774453
> These places aren't socialist or communist lol.
> ITS NOT REAL COMMUNISM!!

> Also they are extremely poor and nobody would ever want to live there lmao

They are poor, though that has nothing to do with being socialist. Rojava wasn't exactly the cayman islands before Syria collapsed either.

>>7773824

>we would need Skynet-level tech for that
we just need aouto driving car. are you going to kill the millions of 30-55 y/o drivers unable to retrain in computing or your going to adopt UBI?

>less people have to work
that's the problem you brainlet. what are u going to do in an economy with 30% structural unemployment rate?

>>7773716
>>7774653

>>7774624
>> ITS NOT REAL COMMUNISM!!
It's not because communism is impossible.
It's just another wannabe communist/socialist shithole like every other comparable shithole on earth.

>They are poor, though that has nothing to do with being socialist.
TOP WEW
It has everything to do with being socialist.
If they were a free market with no central bank they would be an extremely rich autonomous area like Neutral Moresnet which was basically anarcho-capitalist.

>>7774653
>what are u going to do in an economy with 30% structural unemployment rate?
Why would the unemployment rate be that high?
The service sector industry would be exploding.
Most people would be retired anyway. You would probably only have to work 5-10 years before you could retire.
Deflation is a good thing.

>>7774453
>Clearly economic arguments can be proven wrong using logic
t. austrian

> Yeah he only wanted state socialism for germany but the rest of the world he wanted stateless socialism.
> Suuuurrrreee.

Never said that. He seemed happy with the Paris commune, and even used it as a model for a 'transitional socialism'. He praised Warren's market anarchism as another form of 'transitional socialism'. It seems he developed many different ideas as to how an economy could develop into a socialism, given the local conditions.

>>7774621
> It's literally what marx wanted though.
> We weren't talking about you.

You're the one insisting I'm a Marxist.

I understand that he was lobbying for changes to the state in the Communist Manifesto. What I'm not convinced of is that Marx thought an authoritarian state was necessary to reprogram people into a state amicable to communism.

>>7770533
Austrian school's finest..

>>7774722
>unironically thinks you can NOT disprove the idea that a 99999999 trillion dollar minimum wage would cause unemployment using basic logic

Are you actually this retarded?
This is more than the GDP of the entire world.

>>7771755
More like "man this world sucks, everything is controlled by someone else already, not because of merit or capital but because of being the last to conquest and pass it on. Time to conquest!"

>>7774331
but isn't free market good because muh competition will make everything fine? then what i posted is needed for a "fair" free market otherwise is just a playground for corporations

>>7771287
Actually he had many jobs on top of trying to get into the speculative market. Tho Engels was his sugardady

>>7774721
> If they were a free market with no central bank they would be an extremely rich autonomous area like Neutral Moresnet which was basically anarcho-capitalist.

They are a free market, and they've been industrializing and becoming wealthier since they became autonomous. Being at the locus of global conflict isn't helpful.

>>7774746
>He seemed happy with the Paris commune
Which WAS an authoritarian state, but believe what you want brainlet.

>You're the one insisting I'm a Marxist.
You're heavily defending him, I'm quite sure you're a marxist or some kind of socialist.

>I understand that he was lobbying for changes to the state in the Communist Manifesto.
Of course he was.
His ideal is a workers state where the state controls almost every aspect of daily life and central banks run the economy.

Fuck marx and fuck you.

>What I'm not convinced of is that Marx thought an authoritarian state was necessary to reprogram people into a state amicable to communism.
Tell me how exactly marx thought the transition from socialism to communism would magically take place.

>>7771711
>It wasnt real capitalism!

>>7774721
>Most people would be retired anyway. You would probably only have to work 5-10 years before you could retire.
who's gonna pay for it?the robots owners? but isnt that communism?

>>7774785
>but isn't free market good because muh competition will make everything fine? then what i posted is needed for a "fair" free market otherwise is just a playground for corporations

You posted those things as an example of a "free market".
I corrected you and showed that this isn't what a free market is.

Also those things are required for a free market to exist. Most of those things are stupid anyway.
https://mises.org/wire/capitalism-and-asymmetric-information

>>7774806
>They are a free market
No, they are not.
Prove it, you cannot.

>>7774858
>who's gonna pay for it?
Myself with the money I earned at my job which will CONSTANTLY go up in value thanks to deflation.

>but isnt that communism?
no

>>7774753
i dont think you understand what disprove means

>>7774653
>we just need aouto driving car.

Lol, auto driving cars are far from being road-ready.

>trouble with going over bridges
>trouble with bad weather
>trouble with roads without clear markings
>trouble reading signs
>trouble with complicated road conditions

>>7774817
> Which WAS an authoritarian state, but believe what you want brainlet.

Except it wasn't. Communities were organized directly by the people living in them, not by an authority. The Paris commune was composed of hundreds of "social clubs" inside and on the outskirts of Paris, and military/policing was an extension of the decisions made by those clubs. Similar to how Rojava is structured today.

> You're heavily defending him, I'm quite sure you're a marxist or some kind of socialist.

I'm certainly a socialist.

> His ideal is a workers state where the state controls almost every aspect of daily life and central banks run the economy.

Why aren't you able to actually provide any evidence for anything you claim Marx believed?

> Tell me how exactly marx thought the transition from socialism to communism would magically take place.

Marx used the words "socailism" and "communism" interchangeably. He introduces the ideas of "low" and "high" communism and uses them occasionally, where "low" refers to transitional models like syndicalism, market anarchism, programatism, etc.. which currently exist, and "high" refers to a hypothetical global mode of production.

>>7772307
>living standards for workers will constantly decrease to a subsistence level
But thats literally whats happening. Oh sorry, right, not real capitalism

>>7774884
> No, they are not.
> Prove it, you cannot.

they have a market and no state ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Friendly reminder to the filthy gommunists ITT that command economies dont work (lol)

>>7772893
Can I have 1 btc comrade?

>>7775111

no

>>7773238
>>7773508
>contradictions of capitalist
>Don't exist.

Yes, they do. Money is the prime example, two of the three main functions of money are directly contradict each other: Money must serve as a store of value, and at the same time as a means of exchange. The more value you assign to a certain amount of currency, the less likely you are to use it as a means of exchange, and this problem is compounded if we are talking about a physical amount, which can't simply be divided into arbitrarily small pieces, or if the subjective value is hard to determine. And if an object is not used as a means of exchange willingly, we could conclude that it holds value. The end result of this logic is printing worthless pieces of paper which everybody knows are worthless but which everybody must treat as if they hold fixed value, and this is achieved by adding certainty in the form of the threat of governmental force and removing certainty by simultaneously advocating 2% inflation per annum so that no significant part of the population has the crazy idea to hold onto their money, causing a deflationary spiral.

I think the main point that caused me to tie myself to orthodox marxism when I was a teenager (as opposed to that wacky sjw nonsense that is branded as marxist) was the marxian-hegelian idea of "contradictions" existing in the order of reality caused by the economic base, and that it was possible, due to the whig idea of history progressing towards ever more freedom / equality (which are also in a certain sense contradictory to each other, which already Plato wrote about), to transcend those contradictions.

Question for the smart people here.

If capitalism is so good then why USA has debt in the trillions and worse health/education than Cuba?

If socialism doesnt work then why do they try so hard to sabotage Cuba or outright bomb the fuck out of Lybia when it was a clear proof that socialism was clearly succeeding?

What do you think would happen if all trade-economics sanctions are removed from Cuba?

>>7770533
most influential of the 19th century

>>7775162
Maybe this matter of conceptualizing affairs (in terms of "contradictions" existing in the state of reality) is fundamentally flawed, or at least unintuitive. After all, many religions on this planet speak about the complementary nature of things, or of a dualistic split (usually between good and evil), but none hold that that reality is peopled with things of a downright contradictory nature. Maybe it is this idea, borrowed from Hegel, which causes the the stubborn tenacity with which marxism is held by some, because besides the unreadable hegel, no other worldview afaik has this idea at its core. And if you are driven to this kind of view by outside circumstances (such as, seeing the hypocritical nature of people in general) when you are young, you need to find an outlet. If you read Mao's "On Contradiction", you can see how far this type of thinking can be taken, and how seemingly absurd some of the examples are, while still fitting into the general idea. This, however, usually means that the idea is vague and has no theoretical use.

Modern economics apparently also does not think about affairs in this way, although it could easily be done, as I have just demonstrated, and in this case I believe it is beneficial to think about the matter in this way. Just why is anyone's guess.

Would appreciate some input here.

>>7770533
It's economic philosophy. To any anons out there who haven't read it, do so. Das Kapital is genuinely worth a read. It'll help you understand economics better.
And then to understand how humanity continues to desire its existence despite the system failing time again, follow Das Kapital up with some Carl Jung - "Man and his symbols".
What Jung points out, and I think correctly, is that communism is going nowhere because the idea of it is embedded into humanity. A big entity (the government) looking after and caring for the entire population is a highly desired ideal. Because it resembles the infant state of a child being cared for by their mother, which is something deep down a lot of people wish for. It's comfy.
On a side note I think this explains the phenomena of why communists usually are quite pathetic creatures. Socialists are usually obese or ghastly underweight. They look pale and sick. A lot drug abuse going on there. Communists are the gutter trash of society. They can't look after themselves, so they need the government to do it for them. My two cents anyway.
>pic unrelated

>>7774793
>>7770533
his kids literally starved to death

>>7775500
i think the contradictory state of nature is the norm throughout history. dualistic principles of morality and society are ancient concepts going back to prehistory.
People shit on marx like they shit on freud because they dont understand the influence on the current paradigm. They only point out the flaws but ignore the many basic ideas because they arent aware they already became "common knowledge"

>>7771672
They made some good music though.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MAvgDhI01_A

Best.

We need to Mariel Boat lift every single libertarian capitalist into the middle of the ocean if we want to survive

>>7771519
Neither Friedman nor rothbard provided anything of value to the world ever.

Both should been hung.

>>7772001
What kind of idiot thinks Marxism isnt inline with human nature.

Damn, imagine being this stupid.

>>7775514
Yes, but the only way this idea is introduced is through the backdoor, so to speak. It's quite fascinating, it's almost as if the entirety of marxism is a trojan horse, because a whole lot of those concepts make more sense when seen in terms of psychology and the basic hegelian schema. then in the end this nonsense about the state withering away creeps in, and in a certain sense there is some logic behind it, but at the same time the idea also comes out of nowhere. hence why zizek is so popular today, and why there is such a thing as marxist psychoanalysis. One wonders what forces really were at work there, seeing as this meme became a memetic success before vanishing into the gutters, in your words, never to be beholden seriously again.

>>7775774
That is true as well.

>>7775514

This is 90% spot on, including the part about most tankies being frail man-children, but I feel like Society of the Spectacle would be good to throw in between Marx and Jung. The colonization of the mind via the mobilization of the media, which debord explores, is integral in understanding the ambient/liberal mythos as the state as the only apparatus which can fill the maternal role. (rather than it being the manifestation of the destruction of the maternal role of the community)

>>7770533
He’s been thoroughly debunked, both theoretically and practically. He continues to enjoy popularity among a certain stripe of conspiracy theorist, but pretty old-fashioned

>>7776386
marx's global communist prediction is a bit of a leap. he doesnt explain how exactly it will happen or when or even what form it will take. Its more a "general direction of history".
I think its because capital is very strong against labour in the short term, but weaker against labour in the long term. Perhaps marx was extrapolating to its logical conclusion, that eventually capitalism will collapse. "eventually" being a fucking long time.

>>7776742
what exactly has been debunked in relation to his economic theory (and not his political philosophy)? He just elaborated Adam Smith's alienation of labour theory and described various characteristics of the capitalist system (e.g. surplus value). More and more modern economists accept Marx's positions as the most accurate positions from 19th century economists.

>>7776960

Marx should never have said anything about "high" communism, especially not in his later work. Honestly it adds very little of substance to his writing and just confuses people.

Itt people that can't separate Marx's materialism analysis from communism

jews did 9/11

>>7776960
>>7777104

Also, remember that he was a student of Hegel, who was looking to develop a theory of history segmented into neatly organized chunks emerging cleanly from contradictions, and eventually arriving at a perfectly stable synthesis. Marx' historical materialism is a response to what he calls Hegel's "historical idealism", and by extension, imports some of Hegel's bullshit.

Basically, Marx was smart as fuck but got JUST'd by early modernism

>>7773986

LOL, peter, heh, just making up first names.

engels was genius; both speculators; "It was an apologia for the stock exchange men. But one can perfectly well be at one and the same time a stock exchange man and a socialist and therefore detest and despise the class of stock exchange men. Would it ever occur to me to apologise for the fact that I myself was once a partner in a firm of manufacturers.. There’s a fine reception waiting for anyone who tries to throw that in my teeth!

And if I could be certain of making a million on the stock exchange tomorrow, and thus put an ample supply of funds at the disposal of the party in Europe and America, to the stock exchange I should promptly go."

Engels to Bernstein. 27 February-1 March 1883

>>7777097
DYOR, conspiracy theorist

>>7770533
The worst. Now GTFO

>>7778823

Engels is great. Love The Origin of the Family. Anti-Duhring was weird though. He steps back from primitive accumulation as capitalism's seed, and doesn't really ever justify making that enormous leap.

>>7776960

patience, its coming, marx got the time-frame wrong, we need automation first on a global scale.

>>7779049

I dont see why everyone thing durr hurr massive strides in automation = communism

Capitalism could just as easily restructure into a different form of slavery, collapse into something more diverse (like the roman empire -> feudalism), or kill off the labor class

>>7779151

or kill off everyone, for that matter

though I guess if capitalism kills the labor class you'd have a sort of communism for rich people kek

>>7772307
actually read marx and stop posting, brainlet

Making bad historical inferences to make bad social predictions to encourage bad markets.

/leftypol/ please stop trying to "agitate" on here, it is getting embarrassing at this point.

>>7772191
>His writings were a rejection of metaphysical approaches to economics/politics for a historical approach based on the rational interest of participating groups/individuals... that really shines through on The German Ideology and The Poverty of Philosophy

Which is the biggest problem he runs into. The problem isn't his critiques of current society or capitalism. Alienation of labor is legit as fuck. The problem is where he starts and where he finishes.

His "historical" analysis is needed because otherwise Manifesto gets BTFO'd by modernism. It appeals emotionally and is easy for people to relate to but has too big of a logical gap.

>human history is always sucking (already a dubious claim)
>capitalism fails always (????)
>people suffer because of it

ALL WAY TO

>Capitalism is the biggest source of human suffering

ALL THE WAY TO

>Capitalism will end violently with industrialization.


There is no concrete logic to follow between these jumps. He relies on what is more or less anecdotal experiences of common people to make self fulfilling prophecies.

>>7779634

Yep, this is the weakest part of his shit. Basically, the earlier you go in his writing, the more Hegalian/bullshit it is.

Later when he starts actually developing an analysis of history to explain characteristics of capitalism, and develops ideas about how various aspects of capitalism interact, he gets more interesting. These are all aspects of his ideas that he throws out there early on, but doesn't really start to develop until Grundrisse.

>>7775514
>>7776699
Good points to consider there anon. Have a (you)
>>7776386
>backdoor
I agree with all of that. It's really funny to see how the communist considers himself to be some egdy contrarian where as in the real world his views are backed by the political, media and education establishments.
It makes me chuckle to see somebody so unaware, so stupid and so utterly pathetic that they haven't worked out that they're not the "free thinking geniuses" they herald themselves to be.

>>7779941
>they're not the "free thinking geniuses" they herald themselves to be.

If people were better read in philosophy we wouldn't have this problem. Pretty much every work I've had to read and write on has ideas that have sounded really great in my head. But the best way to think/act as a person and as a society probably isnt all wrapped up in any of these books. Almost all of them are critiques and continuations of others. Nietzsche's critiques of Christian morality and Marx's critiques of capitalism have been jerked into religion for modern men.

How can you constantly take "God is dead" out of context when you still treat books as indisputable truths and political movements as your savior l?

>>7772018
>profit maximizing
>increase in wages

The retard who wrote this needs to KHS.

>>7780195

god has been replaced with the worship of celebrity intellectuals and industrialists via the mobilization of spectacle. The symbology of these new gods convey their hyperreality: From the endless and perfect production of the hyperreal big mac as embodied by the symmetry and perfect uniformity of the double arches; to the hammer and sickle, a supposed iconography of working class liberation, as the signifiers for an empire intent on pacifying its working class.

>>7772647
giving money to niggers doesn't feed them you stupid cuck.

>>7773290
>beav trapper takes LTC

Based

>>7773618
>15

I would believe 50 years maybe

>>7780446
It was made by a low-IQ angsty teenage edgelord. I cringed hard when I read through it.

>>7771916
>insane theories of value of labor
>proven wrong

Laughs internally