At the moment I have reached these conclusions:
the profit comes from human labor.
capital when there is no monopoly, focuses on the competitiveness and meritocracy.
When there is competition, all companies exploit human labor (not redistributing the percentage on the increase in profit), but won the war that lowers production costs, even using the weapon of meritocracy. To lower production costs are large capital to invest in finding new ways of automation, this means that only multinationals can afford to acquire a dominant position in free market conditions. The result is that the free market is actually an oligopolistic system, not at all fair. Warning: the factory inside is merit in conditions of free competition, while the market understood as an economic system is not fair. Upon reaching the dominant position, then the factory can also sometimes go low merit (although not agree).
Justice has to do with the exploitation and dominance (which uses the same concept as when Marx said that capitalism can only afford to buy the means of production), while meritocracy can exist even in an unjust economic system.
Dear FDD, say I have an activity that gives me a bit of money because the state requires a regulated market, not totally free. Assume that the market will become free. The multinational, having more capital to invest, manage to destroy the small businesses this way ... there will never be a just redistribution of wealth, because profit is not as devoted to work, but one that has a larger capital behind them and can afford to invest more. The state then sets the market when it prevents the big capitalists to become dominant, expropriating the property of small businesses under the guise of free market .... In practice, the state ensures that the capitalists have an advantage over others based on their starting capital. The state starts all at the same level, and it prevents a totally free market. In Marx's Capital is told of how the capitalist they stole the common land to the peasants and farmers, and established the great capitalist property. Today the commons are the state's ability to regulate the market. A requirement that the liberal attempt to wipe out. The peasants dispossessed of land, ended up being exploited as wage earners, in houses without any guarantee of hygiene, where disease and death were the order of the day (this is told in the capital). Globalization is a systematic process of enrichment of oligarchies capitalist exploiting cheap labor (both manual and intellectual dear engineer!). No need to be Marxists to support this assertion, in my opinion ...
The concept of meritocracy in the factory is a concept very positive ... it is absolutely right. But I think the merit it can be measured by the achievement of any goal, even different from increased profits.
Automating toyota should be considered as an example to follow, but we must also look at the context in which it was necessary to automate. It should be noted the economic system which was part of the factory at that time, to understand the reasons for the meritocracy.
On the other hand, the state should regulate, but does not itself become investor (such as Keynesianism), because in this case, it would be wrong, but would give orders and contracts friendly company, causing the monster of inefficiency that has been the welfare state (welfare state rather than inclusive).
democracy can be summarized in two words: meritocracy (freedom) and solidarity (community). The middle class is the barometer of democracy, as Aristotle already understood. However, read the book, thank you, I apologize for the papyrus ...
0 comments:
Post a Comment