serious

Discord ID: 793519133177675802


1,898 total messages. Viewing 100 per page.
Prev | Page 2/19 | Next

2021-01-16 20:39:28 UTC

I don't think the value of a good is dependent on the labor necessary to produce the good

2021-01-16 20:40:04 UTC

Well we have to understand what Marx means by value

2021-01-16 20:40:05 UTC

Obviously when we make mathematical models it's there's a big correlation but I don't think that means that they're actually is some sort of objective factor that is actually predicting what the price is going to be it seems like it's based on subjective preferences

2021-01-16 20:40:18 UTC

Value to Marx is basically price

2021-01-16 20:40:45 UTC

It's exchange value right?

2021-01-16 20:40:49 UTC

Yea

2021-01-16 20:41:12 UTC

It's neither

2021-01-16 20:41:31 UTC

It's just firms theory of buying pretty much now

2021-01-16 20:41:42 UTC

No value judges prices

2021-01-16 20:42:03 UTC

Subjective and objective

2021-01-16 20:42:10 UTC

Neither really change prices nor set prices in the 1st place

2021-01-16 20:45:15 UTC

So I can't pretend to know exactly what modern Marxist argue for like maybe certain of his theories were vindicated by neoclassical economics or something but when I generally conceptualize the labor theory of it seems that marx was developing a system of economic prediction based off of these other thinkers of his time and they held the opinion the price of a commodity is the same as the labor that is expended to create it and that's how we came up with this theory of exploitation now if you're arguing for something different I don't totally know because Im basically rejecting his theory of exploitation because he's starting from false premises

2021-01-16 20:45:44 UTC

Yeah, they can be exploited but they aren't exploited in the way Marx says they are

2021-01-16 20:46:13 UTC

Marx's Theory of Alienation was right on

2021-01-16 20:46:51 UTC

I could see that being true

2021-01-16 20:47:02 UTC

@slavecaste prices remained rigid in the face of a huge collapse in aggregate demand due to government intervention lol

2021-01-16 20:47:20 UTC

There was barley any government intervention in COVID

2021-01-16 20:47:23 UTC

(((Keynes)))

2021-01-16 20:47:26 UTC

It was private central banker intervention and massive austerity

2021-01-16 20:47:28 UTC

Keynes was based

2021-01-16 20:47:33 UTC

Friedman wasn't

2021-01-16 20:47:55 UTC

most recessions prior to 1945 saw deflation in CPI

2021-01-16 20:48:07 UTC

Yeah, S&D was very flexible back then

2021-01-16 20:48:11 UTC

Marginalism was right at one point

2021-01-16 20:48:22 UTC

open market operations are a form of gov intervention

2021-01-16 20:48:29 UTC

No they aren't

2021-01-16 20:48:35 UTC

and are supported by virtually all keynesians

2021-01-16 20:48:36 UTC

OMO's are just private central bank intervention

2021-01-16 20:48:40 UTC

Yeah, those are monetarists not Keynesians

2021-01-16 20:48:55 UTC

they just say they aren't enough

2021-01-16 20:49:02 UTC

I mean literally that's true though

2021-01-16 20:49:09 UTC

because Keynes hated central bank action for recessions

2021-01-16 20:49:11 UTC

Friedman loved it

2021-01-16 20:49:21 UTC

I still laugh at lolberts who blame Keynes for the mess we have now

2021-01-16 20:50:02 UTC

not really friedmanites believe in inflation targeting, not countercyclical monetary policy

2021-01-16 20:50:10 UTC

Friedman was a retard for rejecting ABCT

2021-01-16 20:50:10 UTC

Yes they do

2021-01-16 20:50:10 UTC

LOL

2021-01-16 20:50:17 UTC

ABCT is false now

2021-01-16 20:50:21 UTC

It's a defense for usury

2021-01-16 20:50:32 UTC

I'm usurypilled

2021-01-16 20:50:37 UTC

he did, where?

2021-01-16 20:50:44 UTC

Feder's Theory of Interest <:chad:793675087064465449>

2021-01-16 20:50:55 UTC

In his general theory and every other literature he had

2021-01-16 20:51:06 UTC

He saw central bank action as barley demand responding for recessions

2021-01-16 20:51:40 UTC

Keynes believed in spurring investment which open market operations precisely do

2021-01-16 20:51:41 UTC

no you aren't

2021-01-16 20:51:45 UTC

are you ?

2021-01-16 20:52:05 UTC

No, he believed in socializing investment which is basically debt-free money to the government.

2021-01-16 20:52:09 UTC

well I obviously dont think all interest is usury or whatever

2021-01-16 20:52:11 UTC

Basically fiscal policy but no national debt

2021-01-16 20:52:31 UTC

all interest is wrong and anti-bible

2021-01-16 20:52:47 UTC

but I think what hammer and sickle is saying is that ABCT doesnt describe the nature of modern business cycles which I agree with but thats because of the government/central planners/private banks or whatever we want to call them

2021-01-16 20:52:58 UTC

'hammer and sickle'

2021-01-16 20:53:06 UTC

My emoji isn't hammer and sickle but call me cash plz

2021-01-16 20:53:06 UTC

hammer and hammer

2021-01-16 20:53:09 UTC

Lel

2021-01-16 20:53:22 UTC

i assumed it was meant to represent a hammer and sickle

2021-01-16 20:53:26 UTC

Austrians got lucky and only described 1 RECESSION throughout history

2021-01-16 20:53:29 UTC

and that was the early 20's one

2021-01-16 20:53:46 UTC

ive also seen empirical evidence to suggest it accurately described the great depression

2021-01-16 20:53:50 UTC

No

2021-01-16 20:53:55 UTC

Usury and Worldwide Austerity caused TGDP

2021-01-16 20:54:24 UTC

well that may have worsened it under FDRs years but lets not forget it originally started with hoover

2021-01-16 20:54:46 UTC

It started it

2021-01-16 20:54:51 UTC

FDR got us out of TGDP

2021-01-16 20:54:56 UTC

and then did Austerity and got us back in

2021-01-16 20:54:59 UTC

fucking dumbasssss...

2021-01-16 20:55:38 UTC

idk if he got us out do you have any articles on that?

2021-01-16 20:55:42 UTC

sure

2021-01-16 20:55:49 UTC

not saying "umm provide a source" im just interested cause ive never head that

2021-01-16 20:56:15 UTC

lol wut

2021-01-16 20:56:26 UTC

Great article debunking Merchant Economics (Austrian) and Marxist economics

2021-01-16 20:57:06 UTC

Yea

2021-01-16 20:57:08 UTC

Did you not know that?

2021-01-16 20:58:45 UTC

where?

2021-01-16 20:59:51 UTC

also Lord Keynes, the guy who runs the blog you linked, literally calls Austrians like Rothbard anticapitalists for being against fractional reserve banking (what I presume you would consider usury)

2021-01-16 21:00:40 UTC

''…will be sufficient by itself to determine an optimum rate of investment. I conceive, therefore, that a somewhat comprehensive socialisation of investment will prove the only means of securing an approximation to full employment; though this need not exclude all manner of compromises and of devices by which public authority will co-operate with private initiative. But beyond this no obvious case is made out for a system of State Socialism which would embrace most of the economic life of the community. It is not the ownership of the instruments of production which it is important for the State to assume. If the State is able to determine the aggregate amount of resources devoted to augmenting the instruments and the basic rate of reward to those who own them, it will have accomplished all that is necessary…''

2021-01-16 21:00:44 UTC

rothbard vindicated once again

2021-01-16 21:01:10 UTC

FRB isn't usury in itself. FRB (Full Reserve Banking) actually causes deflationary monetary policy which leads into usury.

2021-01-16 21:01:18 UTC

I believe in FRB (Fractional Reserve) with no interest

2021-01-16 21:01:49 UTC

all that argues is that usury should be done by the state and not private business

2021-01-16 21:02:02 UTC

:yes: but not by income tax

2021-01-16 21:02:03 UTC

by LVT

2021-01-16 21:02:06 UTC

<:chad:793675087064465449>

2021-01-16 21:02:55 UTC

LVT is based indeed

2021-01-16 21:03:05 UTC

LVT is the best feudalism

2021-01-16 21:03:12 UTC

we love our feudalism

2021-01-16 21:03:19 UTC

every citizen a feudal lord

2021-01-16 21:13:07 UTC

bad take

2021-01-16 21:13:39 UTC

Personally I have come to believe that interest – or, rather, too high a rate of interest – is the β€˜villain of the piece’ in a more far-reaching sense than appears from the above. But to justify this belief would lead me into a longer story than would be appropriate in this place.

Keynes, β€˜Saving and Usury’, 1932

2021-01-16 21:13:41 UTC

πŸ’―

2021-01-16 21:17:22 UTC

well having too high an interest rate is obviously bad but I don't think you can have an economy without interest due to the time value of money

2021-01-16 21:18:08 UTC

you mean time preference?

2021-01-16 21:18:18 UTC

you can have time preference without interest

2021-01-16 21:18:34 UTC

most people care about the expected return on capital (basically the profit businesses make)

2021-01-16 21:18:36 UTC

not return on savings

2021-01-16 21:22:09 UTC

well its an implication of time preference, but specifically the time value of money

1,898 total messages. Viewing 100 per page.
Prev | Page 2/19 | Next