From: Diego Guerrero (diego.guerrero1@telefonica.net)
Date: Wed Jun 11 2008 - 05:18:14 EDT
Hi, Paul C.,
We shouldn't be impressed by the apparent differences betwen ordinary
(capitalist) money and money of account. The crux of the matter is whether
money is inserted in a society where the law of value is still governing the
economy or instead use value has been enforced by a conscious population
that aims to finish exploitation and inequalities at the world level. In
order to achieve this goal the first thing is to end with the determination
of wages by the value of labour force. The different (capitalist) cost of
reproducing a unit of differenciated workers must be replaced by a single
cost for all people since every person is now equal to all others and
therefore they "cost" the same to society: just the same fraction of the
cost of reproduction of society. This change in the "incomes" completely
alters the demand and necessarily forces the supply to change... The second
necessity is to plan demographic growth and localization of labour force and
means of production at a world level. This means using use values again, and
this is used again AGAINST the law of value. The demographic growth at a
rate of 4% or whatever else is a matter of secondary importance. The point
is the necessity to move masses of people from one point to another:
specialists and qualified workers towards where they are most needed, simple
work force to other places, masses of specific means of production... In my
opinion, there has to be a massive net transfer of population from
underdeveloped countries to developed countries, and the opposite direction
is required for means of production. This is why demographic growth has not
to be understood as the result of natality rates but mainly of migration
rates. It is something like inverting the rates of Table 1.
http://gsociology.icaap.org/report/demsum.html
Table 1
Summary, Population Change
Annual Average Annual Average
Growth Rate Growth Rate
1960-80 1980-01
All 2.33% 1.82%
Less Developed 2.93% 2.25%
More Developed 0.94% 0.48%
Data source: U.S. Census Bureau, International Data Base
Cheers,
Diego
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Cockshott" <wpc@dcs.gla.ac.uk>
To: "Outline on Political Economy mailing list" <ope@lists.csuchico.edu>
Cc: "Heinz Dieterich" <hdieterich@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2008 11:56 PM
Subject: RE: [OPE] markets and socialism
It was a zip file which can be decompressed to yield a pdf.
I am slowly working through it. I am as yet unconvinced that his
money of account would really be any different from ordinary money.
Soviet official doctrin was that the rouble was just a money
of account, which had some credibility given the directive nature
of the plan there, with Diego's decentralised system it looks to
me as if the money of account would be money as we know it.
I am also less than convinced that it would be possible to
plan world population growth in such a way as to achieve a
rate of demographic growth of 4% in a country like Spain, or
more generally that a higher demographic growth could be
achieved in OECD than non OECD countries. It is one thing for
a communist government to limit family size as in China, it
is quite another for it to be able to enforce much larger family
sizes as would be required to achieve a 4% rate of population
growth.
One also has to ask whether, given the current water shortages
in Spain that it makes any kind of sense to plan for Spain to
have a population 3 times its current size in 30 years time.
Climate modelling indicates even greater aridity to be expected
by then.
Paul Cockshott
Dept of Computing Science
University of Glasgow
+44 141 330 1629
www.dcs.gla.ac.uk/~wpc/reports/
_______________________________________________
ope mailing list
ope@lists.csuchico.edu
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/ope
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Jun 30 2008 - 00:00:16 EDT