• Google
    This Blog Web

October 2011

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30 31          

RSS Feed

Bookmark and Share

Email Feed

  • Powered by FeedBlitz

« Yin & Yang in Modern China | Main | A Goal Postponed »

December 27, 2007


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Rich Paul

Why did Marx fail to predict the course which would be taken by laissez faire? Because if you buy a thing, you increase the price of that thing. This is basic supply and demand.

Marx saw a world in which capitalism was 75 years old, and therefore jobs were few and labor cheap, and thought that a liniar extrapolation of trends would provide him with the answers of the universe. He was a damn fool. He might have been right, if there was a way to "make" more workers quickly and easily. Maybe if one could throw a one-cell clone in the microwave and pull out a full grown worker, stocked with enough information to do some industrial job, Marx would have been somewhere.

As for studying Marx solving the problems he forsaw, sorry, wrong answer.

The leftover Marxian delusions have moved us away from free markets. This has slowed economic growth. This has caused slow growth in demand for labor. This has caused slow growth in wages.

If we had established a real gold standard, eliminated fractional reserve banking, and eliminated business regulation (except requiring that they, live everyone else, respect property and refrain from violence), we could well have had 10% economic growth per anum, instead of 3%. And since the population would have grown much more slowly, wages would have risen. As a matter of fact, they may have risen even faster than this simple model would predict, because rich, educated people have fewer children than the poor, ignorant ones who flow from our socialist public schools, frequently with their first and second attempts at reproduction already in tow.

The only way to avoid increases in wealth, across the whole society, is to grown government and provide privlege. Note that wealth is not privlege. Privlege is from latin: privis, meaning private, and legis, meaning law. Privlege is what happens when the law treats different people differently. Of course, this becomes inevitable, once the law starts mucking about in the economy.

Trying to find redeeming value in Marx is hopeless.

The comments to this entry are closed.