MarLen, have you read up on elementary price theory? The arbitrage of speculators brings the market closer to market-clearing prices faster than otherwise. This means more people more often are able to benefit from exchange.
You only say on the “great famine”
It lasted many years with devastating consequences to the chinese society and that was only the famine part, the milliones more directly executed and tortured by the socialist regime would be another matter entirely.
Though one could make the argument that the totalitarian regime and its officials encouraged cannibalism as a form of control over the chinese people.
how many, killed of famine under capitalism? Made this account?
Not a single one because capitalism can’t kill anybody it only enables people to act and think as free individuals, if anything capitalism has feed more people than any other economic system in history.
Not remember that the standard of living of chineses bettered substantially in period 1949-1975. Life expectancy increased of less tham 40 in 1949 to 63 years of age at birth in 1975
Yeah and the socialist state “withered away” and gave birth to the glorious communist society… XD
The fundamental difference between a wage earner and capitalist is that earner of capitalist comes of work of others.
One can just as easily say, the earnings of a wage earner comes from the forgone consumption (saved capital) of others. Labor and capital are complementary factors of production.
Feud was “complementary factor of production”? No. Was a social relation, as CAPITAL.
I know on a case of a factory of brick that when was private property, was failed and firing wokers, but workers decided assume collectively the management of factory, expropriated the enterpreneur. and maitened the factory operating, collectively. Result: the debts was paid, the dismissed was reemployed.
Therefore, the workers not need to submit to “shift the structure of production” (as you explained). Want another example? The Whirlpool closed a factory in Indiana, here in United States to move their operation to Mexico, because the workforce is more cheap in Mexico.
Not a single? So 1 millhons of deaths in Ireland in “golden age of liberalism” (words of Mises) was nobody? Or poor is not man? Ou when it treat on disasters caused by capitalism you do not remeber?
Free individuals? Sure, individuals that worked in workhouses in England during the “golden age of liberalism” was very “free”.
Can you quickly define what free markets are? What rights are respected in free markets?
“Free market” to whom? Workhouses (defended by Bentham and others classical liberals) was free?
this is a non sequitur from the get go… what freaking capitalist doesn’t work??? I have never seen one… well maybe a trust fund baby - but his pappy sure did… WTF???
it is hard to believe that there are still true believers in USSR et al.
I’m not advocating USSR. Only I said that Russians lived better in USSR that in present time. This does not mean advocate USSR. Is an assetion so abvious has the sun rise tomorrow.
You are arguing against free markets. What are you arguing against?
What do you mean by “Feud”?
Dubious interpretations of anecdotes mean nothing. Have you read up on elementary price theory or not?
“Therefore, the workers not need to submit to “shift the structure of production” (as you explained).”
Work, like the direction of capital, is for the sake of consumption. Workers are consumers too. Were consumers, in general, better of from that expropriation? Economic science says no, because it directed resources differently from what entrepreneurs, acting as mandatories of the consumer, would have done. Would even the workers who did the expropriating be better off if such expropriation were conducted across society as a whole? Economic science says hell no.
Not a single? So 1 millhons of deaths in Ireland in “golden age of liberalism” (words of Mises) was nobody?
Actually the famine was caused by bad government and blight
Or poor is not man?
Strawman
Ou when it treat on disasters caused by capitalism you do not remeber?
Capitalism caused bad govenrment laws and fungi infection? XD
Free individuals? Sure, individuals that worked in workhouses in England during the “golden age of liberalism” was very “free”
As long its isnt any violence involved any agreement is voluntary and therefore its paticipants are free.
Thought I disagree that it was the “golden age of liberalism” since there was still a bad government making laws and interfering with the economy.
Government was blamed if the landowners prefered export to England.
Sure, the serf, I said, wokers that worked “voluntary” at the base of whip (adam Smith said that “the master has a right to correct his servant moderately, and if he should die under his correction it is not murther, unless it was done with an offensive weapon | or with forethought and without provocation.”) in workhouses, paradise of “freedom” hat according the americans ownersslaves, was worse that slavery.
You certainly never read Mises, because Mises considered the 19th century as “golden age of liberalism” (and repeats).
It was a golden age of liberalism. Yes there were human/property rights abuses, and those abuses caused reductions of wealth; but those abuses were less widespread than in the rigid caste society that had preceded it. Thus living standards skyrocketed during the industrial revolution.
Government was blamed if the landowners prefered export to England.
If the govenrmnet enacts laws to do so then it is responsible not the free market.
Sure, the serf, I said, wokers that worked “voluntary” at the base of whip (adam Smith said that “the master has a right to correct his servant moderately, and if he should die under his correction it is not murther, unless it was done with an offensive weapon | or with forethought and without provocation.”) in workhouses, paradise of “freedom” hat according the americans ownersslaves, was worse that slavery.
Again you are using the slavery strawman, I believe someone already explained you that its useless to compare capitalism to slavery.
You certainly never read Mises, because Mises considered the 19th century as “golden age of liberalism” (and repeats).
Wrong, what I dispute is the misuse you give to the concept “the golden age of liberalism” to blame every bad governmnet rule and law on capitalism when in fact Mises was talking of the XIX as the period most receptive to liberal ideas, which doesnt mean that every country on Earth or every state policy at that time was a liberal one.
At best you are confused about misesian concepts, at worst you are intellectually dishonest.
That age of human rights abuses (the property rights of richs was secured), is the “golden age of liberalism”, according to Mises, observe as Mises celebrated this age. Now has idea on that means “liberalism”, that Mises so advocates?
When I Say that the arguments of yours, serves to justify slave and caste societies, you do not understand. According to yours argument, so the rigid caste society that had preceded the industrial revolution also was justified. Imagine a Lord arguing to servant: “now you have land, the slaves in Antiquity not had”. During the Antiquity also living standards bettered. The slavery bejustified?
Now has idea on that means “liberalism”, that Mises so advocates?
Sorry, I can’t understand this question due to its incorrect grammar.
When I Say that the arguments of yours, serves to justify slave and caste societies, you do not understand. According to yours argument, so the rigid caste society that had preceded the industrial revolution also was justified. Imagine a Lord arguing to servant: “now you have land, the slaves in Antiquity not had”. During the Antiquity also living standards bettered. The slavery bejustified?
Slavery and caste stuctures never bettered living standards. The two institutions entail collective ownership of goods and persons, and thus preclude capital accumulation, economic calculation, and the intensification of the division of labor. Thus they inherently hamper the improvement of human welfare.
According to response of Felipe, he advcates that the governament forbides exportation to England. You complain that the intervention by governament in “free market”.
“Again you are using the slavery strawman, I believe someone already explained you that its useless to compare capitalism to slavery.” - Wrong, what I dispute are workhouses.
On Mises, is nt “misuse”. Mises refers at the XIX century as “golden age of liberalism”, and repeats, refers to age more liberal of capitalism.
MarLen, nobody here is advocating the restriction of exports or coercive workhouses.
Mises was hailing the general tendency of the age, not every single thing that occurred during the age.
I asked if now you understand on liberalism, because their “golden age” is age of human rights abuses.
Ahd what were the civilization and progress? Not studied on Greek and Roman civilizations? Not was slave societies? And not developed their productives forces?
The theory of economic calculation by Mises is limited and contradictory. According to Mises, outside capitalism, not there economy.