Value of goods

Companies grow and when they dominate the market they can crush any small company opposition

Consumers seem to be the evil guys. They can go to a butchery, bakery, fish market, fruit market or go to a shop that offers all of that. The majority seems to want to spare time and money and crush the small shops, unless they specialize and get really good in a certain niche and sell it online.  

give someone a loan with the knowledge that they could never pay you back

Find a guy with that knowledge and you can close the banks and insurance companies the next day. Because every consumer with some savings would know where to invest and what companies will go bankrupt. Finance use models that measure risk of default. The reason for the Great Recession is that the banks underestimated that risk by a big margin. The original problem is assymetry of information. Credit taker never tells everything the bank, so the bank can't perfectly estimate the probability of getting the credit repayed. The knowledge is assymetrical. In the times of transparency, the assymetry isn't big, but when the years of fat cows come and everything looks rosy, high growth can fuel even less perspective projects. The problem is when the unexpected recession strikes and they bankrupt.

So do you think that solution for hunger in Africa is giving people fish, rather then teaching them how to fish?

There was a cleaning action in my town every year when I was in high school and my class had to clean the school backyard. I swept all of the cigarette butts in front of the old army barracks. The next day freshmen came as usually and threw the butts on the floor again. So next year the schoolmaster said there will be no more cleaning actions, because we're only giving excuse to the polluters. It's always like this, either somebody cares too little, either too much. The point is that we're too old to be romantic and expect that we'll stop the bad guys by setting an example. The least thing we could have done was letting them watch the dirty floor, if not telling them to clean or putting a warning sign. Being a bastard is about effectively solving the problem in the long run, not about not caring.

First of all it is easier to say than to do

Still you haven't answered me. Will the company benefit more from the ambitious guy in the short-term or the family guy in the long term? What kind of message to the other young workers is when the company brags that their ex employee has found a successful work abroad? Will they attract more talented guys or more less talented, that care more about having some secure job and prioritizing free time?

a dishonest person might shop them so they can get their job or promotion

So it's not about honesty. An ambitious guy will risk more than his current position, if he turns a blind eye.

But if everyone gets high salaries then the prices of everything will explode.

Sounds like Switzerland or Norway, yet their purchasing power is skyrocketing vs Africa.

I wanted to learn , if there was an easy way to find value of goods

Marx was the last who talked about value. He's broken the price into a reproductive price, that just sums all the costs, and the profit. So P = C + profit. He wanted to cancel the profit, so prices would be more fair. No profit means no exploatation, so we're talking about socialism now.

After him, in the late 19th century, new school of economic thought was predominant - marginalism. They believed in preferences of consumers. Everything is subjective. Blue T-shirt and pink T-shirt cost both 5 $, but for man the pink one is worth maybe 1 $, so that's how much is he willing to pay max. Maybe costs of production are higher, but if the shop is in the military base and there are only men around, price will have to be 1 $ and the shop will have to cover the loss with profit at blue T-shirts.

Stopping exploitation will not alone save humanity from disaster .

No, it will cause one. We see what abolishing capitalism looks like in N. Korea.

We need to stop wars .

So how do you stop disasters like Rwandan genocide if not with military intervention and invasion?

Stop growth .

If you see capitalism and it's billions of " profits " as  good.

Why would a company invest in the technological improvements if it won't bring them more profit? Do you want to remain on the stone age level of civilization?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biological_thermodynamics

Thanks for reply . This is more like it . You said that Marx had said there was a profit . I have a problem with this word of profit . An organism can obtain more energy than it spends . By doing work . We can say this is because of it's use of muscle power or brain power . We can measure this . And say efficiency . But if the  organism obtains energy without spending energy . This is what happens in human society . Or capitalist society . Profit must be distinguished from work efficiency . Either surplus value . Or traders profit .

Now , I never said that classical socialism as was the case in soviet union was successful . It failed . But what I say that is different from you , is that capitalism is also a failed system . The solution is yet to be found . But in saying macro - centralized  industrial socialism failed . Then  we must ask , how badly did it fail . After all this society , put the first man in space . It may have survived , but for some minor system modification .

Stopping wars , and conventional wars is essential to further human survival .  Even if society has a perfect economy , still humans are divided by ethnic tribe . Communist China almost went to war with communist Russia . Capitalist nations also go to war . War has been a constant in human history . Until the advent of atomic weapons . They seem to be peace makers .

There can absolutely be advancement and development in a non - capitalist system . Social funds will replace capital funds . They are collected in usual way by taxes . But this time they have difect relationship to work and it's measurement .

I don't know man, you need to read Marx's Capital if you like these ideas. We're not inventing anything with this discussion. Marx and Engels figured it all out in the 1860s. There are two classes for marxists. Workers work and get the wage and capitalists don't work and just take the surplus (profit). But this is not relevant description of 21st century economy anmore. It was ok in 19th century, but then we've got the distinction between managers and owners. And you can't say that owners of companies are a problem. They are choosing where to invest like banks, so they ARE doing an useful social function.

Reading is important . One problem in saying that socialist theory is wrong , is perhaps with our  limited  understanding of the time spans needed . Maybe it will take humans ten thousans years to achieve a utopian society . Perhaps our theories are limited in themselves . Applying in some conditions and not others .

As Bertrand Russell said , capitalism is constructive when young and destructive when old . I believe that progress to new society is made slowly . By many steps . In capitalist economy , economic leadership rests with the capitalist class. But not political leadership . Or you end up with the excessive oligarchy .

Both capitalism and communism are utopian and impossible to achieve. Communism because of greed and capitalism, because of it's inefficiencies, as I described in length already. The point is not to waste time dreaming about theories but to solve real problems, regardless of ideological side of solution.

Which is why I asked a practical question . The value of goods . Since knowing this , makes consciouss all economic relations . Now people can choose what system works . And what does not work .

Consumerism is the evil

We all want higher salary at the end of the month, and there's only one way to grow to infinity. Baking bread at home was crushed by bakeries, they were crushed by supermarkets, now supermarkets are under attack of specialized bakeries. There's a fast food opened 24/7, the other bakes the best cakes, yet another healthy eco bio black bread. Everybody is the best in the world at something. Just find a niche, learn e-commerce and conquer the world market. I mean you can't even enjoy a job that's not tailored to your talents/interests, so in such case no wonder you'd want as much free time as possible. On the other hand, making more complex things of course demands bigger company, where workers work together.

We can grow to infinity and beyond . And supply will create it's own demand . Only if we lived on starship Enterprise . Where food is produced by a nuclear powered atomiser . And human offspring in their countless billions will settle on infinite uninhabited worlds .

Back on Earth , where food is grown , and all biological niches are occupied and interconnected . Then a farm will destroy the ecosystem . And this in turn will destroy the biosphere . Causing floods, draughts, extremes of cold and heat . The yield on our farm will reduce . More effort for less gain . Until starvation arrives.

Consumerism , a necessary product of capitalism , needs infinite growth . And this simply can not exist long term on planet Earth . The value of a product , has to take into account , the environmental damage . For example effort X , may produce so much fuel Y . That will stop a human from eating Z excess amount of food to keep warm . But this fuel will damage crops by pollution , by amount N . If X = Z - N , then we live . If less then we die . The carbon foot print needs to be converted to loss in food productivity . In calories .

We can grow food in labs. After the resources of Earth are exhausted, the move to other space objects will be imminent.

We have to learn to live on this planet . Economics seems related to science and biology  and psychology and sociology and politics . It is therefore a difficult subject . If we use agriculture , then we can learn to replace the plants and animals that became scarce as a result of land use . We can use the biological waste we produce , and that includes our dead bodies , as nutrients to allow growth of particular plants and micro - organisms that we destroyed . We can plant agricultural land  , with wild species , after several years use . And let it return to nature .

Our industries must not disturb the delicate balance in nature . Polluting industries must pay cost of clean up . And we must replace fossil fuel with non - polluting sources . Nuclear power must increase . Specially  nuclear fusion reactors . With no harmful waste  . Public transport must replace private transport . Electrical rail . All non - biological waste must be either inert or bio - degradable  , or recyclable.

All nations who face wars of aggression or annihilation , must have means of defence to detter attack by stronger nations . This includes nuclear weapons . As was shown recently , there was no war between India and Pakistan . We should not object to nations acquiring  nuclear technology . War must be made redundant .

In our social organisation , we must return to groupings that exist as inter - dependent economic units . With a natural division of labour . Extended families.  Reduce mobility between diverse groups.  Migrant  labour . We must reform the present trend  of people living alone in seemingly independent lives  .

Our economy , should  allow for all to become conscious  of the economic process . In a direct way . So economy becomes something they control . And allow to take shape .  Such as an organic and flexible evolution . The capability and needs of all , should be precisely visible to all .

First people exchanged fruit for little hairy animals . Then corn for coins . Then paper money for fuel . Then plastic money for a computer . Then an electrical signal for goods  . I was thinking that smart devices attached  to the body or inside the body , can measure activity levels in calories used and can also analyse blood to give indications of hunger etc . These can send signals to mobile . Instant cyber  economy . What you think ?

So in nature, there are three different  "evolutionary" mechanisms. Conversionary, diversionary, and parallel. Yet there are not infinite, but a large number of evolutionary niches. A certain maximum number, for an environment. Finite energetic levels. And since all organisms either feed or predate on other organisms. Or occupy a niche. Then a predatory organism by any evolutionary mechanism, at the same time vacates and occupies an evolutionary niche. And having done so, adapts to that niche, and becomes the animal it displaced. Therefore the diversity of forms is maintained.

This idea of an ideal or perfect diversity of form, is in line with the idea of a created universe. Allowing for the existence of diversity.  The physical laws of conservation of energy, are restraints on this evolutionary process. Any organism, increasing in number by a positive ( profitable) energy exchange, through predation. Then diminishing the predated upon organism, and evolving, then vacates a niche and enters a new niche.

In this sense, the laws of evolution are in accordance with physical laws, and are communistic  ( symbiotic) in nature. By the law of conservation of energy. Each unit volume and unit time of Earth surface, having a definite energetic value, of light energy received from the sun. However the behaviour of organisms, may not be, and can be exploitative or " capitalistic" . But this only leads to the extinction of organism. But  nature replaces these  with identical forms. Therefore exploitative instances, are not exceptions to the law. But specify limits to the contravention of these laws, and maintain them. The body is preserved.

In human terms, this means, that say the capitalist class, by a positive energy exchange with environment, increases in number. Diminishing the working class in number. And then itself evolving to fill the niche, left by absent workers. And even some absent bosses. Therefore any  capitalistic nature  of organisms, only leads to their extinction.  The universe has a keeper. The many destitute children of  the wealthy.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theistic_evolution



https://youtu.be/UsriY8N9u4A


And :


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convergent_evolution

Yes, creationism, evolutionism, Marxism and thermodynamics in one theory. Nice soup.

https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.bjanaesthesia.org.uk/article/S0007-0912(17)49632-2/pdf&ved=2ahUKEwiEnZCL46npAhVQecAKHS0xCAwQFjAQegQIBhAB&usg=AOvVaw2zp7QT6LxzxshrDZuBjXv-

And :

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1046/j.1526-0992.1999.09914.x

Is God a communist. Community a collection of all life on Earth? I may get stoned to death now.......

https://youtu.be/FQ5YU_spBw0

So the concept of life and humanity existed in the mind of God. And if a species through predation or exploitation then destroys  other life forms. And perhaps itself during this process, or a meteor hits the Earth, , then if there is no time to adapt  and species become extinct, then these ecological niches will produce more of the same. As it says in the holy books, if mankind destroys itself, God will replace it with another people. What is surprising, is that communism is not contradictory to creationism. But supports it. It is all part of science. Why there is this short term unevenness in energy and mass distribution, may be because, if there was an even energy distribution, then we would get a static universe.

Therefore by trying to bring in a better world, through equitable exchange, by correct value of goods and environmental protection. We try to bring more stability to this natural process. Our consciouss understanding, eliminates the  unevenness we see at times  in nature, and pain of extinction. We apply science, and take charge of evolution, without extinction. In society as well as nature. Preserving all forms in balance. Evolution then takes a vertical path for all species. Not a horizontal path of one species replacing another. But co - evolution for all.

Another example of  " capitalism", existing in nature, as cannibalism. Allowing organism or species to survive, but not all individuals in a species.  Environmental conditions give rise to economic norms. Not very palatable?  Not if you are a Salamander ! Allowing genetic diversity. Will humans eat each other to allow survival of species?  Cannibalism in humans has historic records.


https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/api.nationalgeographic.com/distribution/public/amp/animals/2019/06/cannibal-morph-amphibians-adapt

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/api.nationalgeographic.com/distribution/public/amp/animals/2019/06/cannibal-morph-amphibians-adapt

https://youtu.be/Y2ODPFiksBE

https://youtu.be/Lv8WHQwo4GY