Re: [OPE] The state under capitalism

Hi Paul,

The problem is not well posed. On the one hand you refer to lack of money,
and seem to mean the availability of metal coins. On the other hand you
refer to an "inadequate transport system." Marx's point is that a
circulation of money sufficient to allow for the collection of rent or taxes
in money requires an adequate development of commodity production in
general, of which the amplitude of transport would certainly be one factor.

howard

<Money taxes preceed capitalism. Lack of money is not a problem, the mint
can readily provide it once coins have been invented.>

* * *

> Was the problem there lack of money or an inadequate transport system to
> marketise the full agricultural surplus?
> My guess would be the later.

howard engelskirchen
he31@verizon.net
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Cockshott" <wpc@dcs.gla.ac.uk>
To: "howard engelskirchen" <he31@verizon.net>; "Outline on Political Econom
y mailing list" <ope@lists.csuchico.edu>
Sent: Saturday, August 14, 2010 11:01 AM
Subject: Re: [OPE] The state under capitalism

> Was the problem there lack of money or an inadequate transport system to
> marketise the full agricultural surplus?
> My guess would be the later.
>
> --- original message ---
> From: "howard engelskirchen" <he31@verizon.net>
> Subject: Re: [OPE] The state under capitalism
> Date: 14th August 2010
> Time: 3:05:38 pm
>
>
> Hello Dave and Paul,
>
> Both of you challenge my reference to Marx's example "that the Roman
> Empire
> twice failed in its attempt to levy all contributions in money" (I.3.3.b
> [means of payment]). See also III.47.4 (money rent). I'm missing
> something. The determination of possbility by structure is nicely
> developed
> in both places.
>
> howard
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Dave Zachariah" <davez@kth.se>
> To: "Outline on Political Economy mailing list" <ope@lists.csuchico.edu>
> Sent: Saturday, August 14, 2010 6:08 AM
> Subject: Re: [OPE] The state under capitalism
>
>
>> On 2010-08-14 06:27, howard engelskirchen wrote:
>>> Just because different social systems
>>> both have a kind of bureaucracy doesn't mean they can be tracked to the
>>> same
>>> structural root. And the same would be true, as you emphasize, for
>>> taxes.
>>
>> Agreed.
>>
>>>
>>> Marx's point about collecting taxes in money is relevant. Where there
>>> isn't enough money in circulation, you can try, but it won't work. When
>>> it becomes possible its not because of an evolution of tax or coercive
>>> structures in place.
>>>
>>
>> I think this notion of 'not enough money' could be quite misleading. The
>> state cannot run out of money, only its capacity to extract taxes with
>> the capitalist sector intact.
>>
>> //Dave Z
>> _______________________________________________
>> ope mailing list
>> ope@lists.csuchico.edu
>> https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/ope
>
> _______________________________________________
> ope mailing list
> ope@lists.csuchico.edu
> https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/ope
>
> The University of Glasgow, charity number SC004401

_______________________________________________
ope mailing list
ope@lists.csuchico.edu
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/ope
Received on Sat Aug 14 16:57:00 2010