From: Paul Zarembka (zarembka@BUFFALO.EDU)
Date: Wed Nov 29 2006 - 15:10:06 EST
What am I called upon to explain? --On Wednesday, November 29, 2006 11:46 AM -0800 Rakesh Bhandari <bhandari@BERKELEY.EDU> wrote: >> Rakesh's conception below is a neoclassical, i.e., the drive for >> consumption drives economic activity. > > Yes if you put it that way, Paul. I too struggled with what Andrew > Trigg is saying but think there is something important to his > argument. > > Note I'm not talking about just anyone's consumption and > just any consumption. The luxury consumption of the possessing class > funded > out of the surplus value from the valorization of capital. That's the > motive of Mr. Moneybags, > not the accumulation of capital as an end in itself. > > Don't see why this is neo classical or feudal. > > Please explain. > > Rakesh > > >> Marx's conception is that luxury >> consumption is basic to simple reproduction, but not to accumulation of >> capital. >> >> Luxury consumption is the drive of the feudal lord. Of course, the >> capitalist also participates in it. >> >> Paul Z. >> >> --On Tuesday, November 28, 2006 11:43 PM -0800 Rakesh Bhandari >> <bhandari@BERKELEY.EDU> wrote: >> >>> All his [capitalists] spending--on luxuries today and in capital >> investments--is >>> motivated by the pursuit of luxury. >> >> ************************************************************************ >> ** THE HIDDEN HISTORY OF 9-11-2001 --"a benchmark in 9/11 research", >> review Volume 23 (2006), RESEARCH IN POLITICAL ECONOMY, P.Zarembka, ed., >> Elsevier *********************** >> http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/PZarembka > > ************************************************************************** THE HIDDEN HISTORY OF 9-11-2001 --"a benchmark in 9/11 research", review Volume 23 (2006), RESEARCH IN POLITICAL ECONOMY, P.Zarembka, ed., Elsevier *********************** http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/PZarembka
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Nov 30 2006 - 00:00:06 EST