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