Re: [OPE] free competition

The market per se is not a bogeyman Jerry. The problem is its conservative/libertarian instrumentation. Jerry: “Is it good for workers that there is competition in the market for labour-power? No, this competition exerts a downward pressure on wages.” A. Agafonow: If there is any market where differentiation hinders competition, it is labor market. This downward pressure is due to an increase of population and automation of production. Without competition you will have to rely on “forced labor” to allocate labor to different uses. Furthermore, I advocate a basic income that would downsize the little influence on decreasing wages attributed solely to competition. Jerry: “Is it good when there is competition among potential tenants for working-class housing? No, it tends to drive up rents.” A. Agafonow: Provided that there is not enough investment in housing… How competition drives wages down while driving rents up? You are very tendentious in the selection of your examples! If we guarantee enough funds going to social housing, we will not have hiking rents and the market will guarantee that the working-class get what they want in terms of location and design. Again, without market you will have to condemn people to live in neighborhoods that they don’t like. Jerry: Is it good for the hungry that there is competition for food? No, it drives up food prices and means that only the hungry who can afford the food can obtain it through the market. A. Agafonow: Earth overpopulation is partly due to historically low price of food. Cases of famine like in Burkina Faso are partly because of the lack of market at all, not only “free” or “regulated” markets. The US is not the world Jerry, and you can find many countries that provide examples of good instrumentation of markets. Competition provides for commutative justice, which is essentially good. We need also distributive justice though. A. Agafonow ________________________________ De: GERALD LEVY <gerald_a_levy@msn.com> Para: Outline on Political Economy mailing list <ope@lists.csuchico.edu> Enviado: lun,11 abril, 2011 09:39 Asunto: Re: [OPE] free competition > But what is missing in this picture Jerry, is that competition is good, > the “regulated” one, both in politic and economy. Alejandro: Good for whom? Is it good for workers that there is competition in the market for labour-power? No, this competition exerts a downward pressure on wages. Is it good when there is competition among potential tenants for working-class housing? No, it tends to drive up rents. Is it good for the hungry that there is competition for food? No, it drives up food prices and means that only the hungry who can afford the food can obtain it through the market. What is missing from YOUR picture, Alejandro, includes the following: - what is good for one party (e.g. class) is often not good for another party. - often what is desirable is solidarity rather than competition; - it is one-sided to only point out that 'competition is good'; it also is survival of the fittest, dog eat dog, the law of the jungle. Yes, regulated markets are better than unregulated markets, but that doesn't mean that competition per se is just or, even primarily, good. In solidarity, Jerry _______________________________________________ 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
Received on Mon Apr 11 02:13:08 2011