I need this question to be answered

[Questioner]

I heard this site is full of Leftists, so I was hoping you guys could help. I know that a lot of Capitalists hire people to manage companies for them, what do you think of these people? Also, Capitalists who use these hired managers, who do we put the blame on for things like the crisis or unemployment? Is it really the Capitalist's fault?

[Victus Mortuum]

I heard this site is full of Leftists, so I was hoping you guys could help. I know that a lot of Capitalists hire people to manage companies for them, what do you think of these people? Also, Capitalists who use these hired managers, who do we put the blame on for things like the crisis or unemployment? Is it really the Capitalist's fault?

This is an incredibly simplistic question, but I will try to keep my answer as simple as possible in turn. The fault isn't with the capitalist class or the coordinator class, but with the economic system itself. The legally protected system of "private ownership" of the means of production inevitably leads to economic crises of many sorts which are terrible for the working class.

[Jazzhands]

I heard this site is full of Leftists, so I was hoping you guys could help. I know that a lot of Capitalists hire people to manage companies for them, what do you think of these people? Also, Capitalists who use these hired managers, who do we put the blame on for things like the crisis or unemployment? Is it really the Capitalist's fault?

The managers you describe are still capitalists. It's the fault of both the big capitalist and the little capitalist. The little, obviously, because he managed the company so badly that it crashed and burned and took the economy with it. The big because

1. He was too lazy to do the work himself at the company he founded.

2. He is sucking up a huge portion of the value of the company with his giant salaries, private jets, golden parachutes, etc. despite the fact that he produces much less than the average worker. This in turn drags down the production process.

3. They were dumb enough to hire these managers in the first place.

[Questioner]

Ok, but, regarding pay, do you still believe the little Capitalists deserve pay for decision-making, if this is not done by the big Capitalist?

[Victus Mortuum]

Ok, but, regarding pay, do you still believe the little Capitalists deserve pay for decision-making, if this is not done by the big Capitalist?

Depends who you ask here, I believe, and at what point in revolution-time you're referring to. I'll assume relatively early, given we're still dealing with pay in general. As far as a member of the coordinator-class (those who actively control capital but do not own it) does productive coordinating work (which is very rarely), they should be paid a wage approximately the same as a skilled worker - though the coordinating class would cease to be distinguished from the working class by this point anyway.

[thriller]

I heard this site is full of Leftists, so I was hoping you guys could help. I know that a lot of Capitalists hire people to manage companies for them, what do you think of these people? Also, Capitalists who use these hired managers, who do we put the blame on for things like the crisis or unemployment? Is it really the Capitalist's fault?

Is it the Capitalist fault for the crisis or unemployment? Yes and no. Yes because the Capitalist's force the workers to sell their labor for a wage. A wage that is so small, the worker becomes dependent on the Capitalist's, which in turn make the worker become a mere commodity for the Capitalist's. By firing people, the Capitalist's are "saving money", when in fact they are damaging peoples lives, and society as a whole. If you fire and hire people, you are part of Capitalist class. But one could argue No to your question as well; merely by pointing out that if the workers seized the means of production and abolished the class system, we wouldn't be in this shithole.

[Victus Mortuum]

Is it the Capitalist fault for the crisis or unemployment? Yes and no. Yes because the Capitalist's force the workers to sell their labor for a wage. A wage that is so small, the worker becomes dependent on the Capitalist's, which in turn make the worker become a mere commodity for the Capitalist's. By firing people, the Capitalist's are "saving money", when in fact they are damaging peoples lives, and society as a whole. If you fire and hire people, you are part of Capitalist class.

I understand this attitude, but you also have to realize that if a capitalist (or his coordinator reps) tried to be nicer to workers then profit would go down and investment would go down and the business would suffer. If one capitalist fails in his capacity to exploit, someone else will drive him to the lower classes. Remember, the ruling investment class is alienated by capitalism just as the worker class is.

[cb9's_unity]

The problem isn't the capitalists, the problem is capitalism. Capitalism as an economic and social system has contradictions within it that cause unemployment and crisis.

For example, under capitalism workers compete with each other in order to gain employment. When there is more competition between workers (which happens during high unemployment) they will be more likely to take lower wages. Despite the fact that this hurts that great majority of people, it is a benefit to capitalists. However when there is very low unemployment, the workers are more likely to demand higher wages (because they will be likely to find work elsewhere if they can't get a satisfying wage). This threatens to cripple capitalists, because if wages are too high it is harder, or impossible, for capitalists to make a profit.

As you can see, what is good for the capitalists is very often bad for the rest of the public. Crisis in capitalism often works the same way.

Thus the blame for the failures of capitalism doesn't fall on capitalists or their managers. They are, as Marx said, capital personified, and thus expected to act in their own self interest. This doesn't mean that we should condone their actions, it simply means we shouldn't expect anything else.

[RedMaterialist]

I heard this site is full of Leftists, so I was hoping you guys could help. I know that a lot of Capitalists hire people to manage companies for them, what do you think of these people? Also, Capitalists who use these hired managers, who do we put the blame on for things like the crisis or unemployment? Is it really the Capitalist's fault?

You ask a very important question. First, the capitalist does indeed hire workers, managers and overseers to produce things to sell (commodities.) The capitalist, however, wants to identify himself with the managers so that he can claim a moral right to the profits created by workers and (to a lesser extent) by managers. Here is Marx on the exact same question:

""Have I myself (the capitalist) not worked? Have I not performed the labour of superintendence and of overlooking the spinner (the workers?) And does not this labour, too, create value?" His overlooker and his manager try to hide their smiles." From Capital, Vol. I, Chapter 7, Section 2.

Thus all the value of a product is either current labor (workers and managers) or previous labor (workers who produced the raw materials or machines.) And the capitalist sells the product at its true value and makes a profit on it. How is this possible? Because labor creates value. Marx calls this value surplus-value; it is the surplus value which is not paid for and which provides the capitalist with his or her profit. This is why the capitalist in the above quote is so anxious to claim that he also labors and creates value.

Crises and unemployment are an integral, unavoidable part of capitalism. Supposedly capitalism, according to the "vulgar" economists (Bernanke, Greenspan, etc.) will solve the problem of crisis and unemployment. Every 7-10 years their theories explode in the faces. And we are looking right now at the consequences.

Its not so much the fault of the capitalists, but they do reap the benefits of unemployment and crisis. Of course, some do go out of business, but that's the nature of the system. Bigger capitalists eat the smaller ones. This, however, does not change the fundamental nature of the system. Why capitalism has the inherent flaw of crisis is another question.

[RedMaterialist]

Ok, but, regarding pay, do you still believe the little Capitalists deserve pay for decision-making, if this is not done by the big Capitalist?

The managers are not themselves capitalists, although certainly they identify and defend capitalism and hope one day to become capitalists. When the business goes bankrupt and they and their families lose their health insurance they (the managers) suddenly discover they are expendable just like the workers they supervise.

Or if they really are "little" capitalists and make a profit by exploiting workers in a small business, then when the crisis hits they usually are eaten by the bigger capitalists. Thus, even a giant capitalist like Lehman Brothers can get eaten by a larger capitalist like Chase. (And Chase can even get the taxpayers to foot the bill for the takeover.)

[fluffy comunist]

well I am not an economy expert... however ... I know it is possible to have an economy that does not exploit the workforce...and does not force milions of ppl to live in extreme poverty for the benefit of few ...