Marxism and investment

[RGacky3]

For those of youwho play with securities or betting on them, how many of you use Marxist style analysis in your decisions? I think the Marxism applied in the way economists like RIchard wolff apply it can really give you an advantage, especially when taking into account fundementals.

For example, just the basic labor theory of value and help you gague the potential profit rate, also the marxist tendancy to always take everything back to the commodity can help you make market connections and figure out what effects what, also if your betting on a macro level Marxism helps even more. I get that this is'nt the point of Marxism, but it definately helps.

Anyway, opinions?

[ComradeMan]

"Labour theory of value" has a lot of issues and most economics is hogwash.

[RGacky3]

Of coarse the labor theory of value has issues, which is why you apply it carefully.

Economics is like any form of analysis, some of it makes sense, some of it is flawed.

[ComradeMan]

Of coarse the labor theory of value has issues, which is why you apply it carefully.

Economics is like any form of analysis, some of it makes sense, some of it is flawed.

Okay, I am being facetious, but I just love the way the "science of economics" gets stuff wrong all over the place and yet we still have to listen to "economists" as if they were somehow gurus of society.

[RGacky3]

You gotta pick the right economists :P.

[RichardAWilson]

I follow John Maynard Keynes's Method (Animal Spirits) and Value Analysis (Benjamin Graham, Warren Buffet).

European financials, for ex., are undervalued based on the fundamentals - (Credit Suisse and Deutsche Bank.)

International telecoms are also undervalued (I.e. TI, FTE, TEF, TMX) - Italy, France, Spain / Latin America and Mexico.

Clean Energy (First Solar),

Oil (Exxon, Total, China Petroleum - PTR and SNP),

Coal (YZC - China's largest private coal miner),

Ethanol (Green Plains Renewable Energy and ADM - Archer Daniels Midland)

General-Electric is a recommendation for growth-oriented diversification. It has been around forever and has been a member of the DOW30 since the beginning. GE has been able to continue reinventing itself to make itself in demand. It's now making massive capital allocations in wind and solar energy.

[Rafiq]

"Labour theory of value" has a lot of issues and most economics is hogwash.

Like what? And, if you're familiar with marx, it's the Theory of Value, not the theory of labor value.

[RichardAWilson]

The idea has been around longer than Marx and was popularized by David Ricardo (a classical economist). Karl Marx even made mention of Ricardo in his own writing.

Karl Marx took and improved Ricardo's LTV (Labor Theory of Value) and transformed the idea into a Theory of Value. Marx's LTV is more scientific and applicable than Ricardo's.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Ricardo

Scroll down to the Section titled "Value Theory."


Later in this chapter, he demonstrates that prices do not correspond to this value. He retained the theory, however, as an approximation. The labour theory of value states that the relative price of two goods is determined by the ratio of the quantities of labour required in their production.

http://www.econlib.org/library/Ricardo/ricP.html

For those interested in Value Theory: Consider reading the first chapter of this book. It's available for free at the website listed above. After which, you can compare (and contrast) Ricardo's LTV with Marx's Value Theory.

[RichardAWilson]

Economics isn’t “hogwash.” There were economists that warned us that we were facing a financial crash and this recession years before they happened. The problem was that no one listened to them until it was too late.

[ComradeMan]

Like what? And, if you're familiar with marx, it's the Theory of Value, not the theory of labor value.

In economics they are referred to as "Labour theories of value".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_theory_of_value#Marx.27s_contribution

http://www.internationalviewpoint.org/spip.php?article284

http://www.isil.org/resources/lit/labor-theory-val.html

http://www.marxist.com/marx-marxist-labour-theory-value.htm

[jake williams]

Marxists are too lazy and disorganized to make any money in the finance industry. It's a long established tradition.

[RichardAWilson]

Did you ever hear of China's "Red Capitalist?"

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2005/nov2005/chin-n29.shtml

Hmm. I don't think he can be grouped with Marxism though.

[Rafiq]

In economics they are referred to as "Labour theories of value".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_theory_of_value#Marx.27s_contribution

http://www.internationalviewpoint.org/spip.php?article284

http://www.isil.org/resources/lit/labor-theory-val.html

http://www.marxist.com/marx-marxist-labour-theory-value.htm

This guy is just making stupid fucking strawman arguments. I wouldn't count this as a legitment criticism against TLV that should be seriously analysed.

[Ocean Seal]

Marxists are too lazy and disorganized to make any money in the finance industry. It's a long established tradition.
Started by Karl Marx.

It is a wonder how someone can know so much about capital, yet have so little of it.
-Karl Marx's Mum

[RichardAWilson]

Hmm. Interesting that his partner in crime was a banker and industrialist.

[L.A.P.]

Okay, I am being facetious, but I just love the way the "science of economics" gets stuff wrong all over the place and yet we still have to listen to "economists" as if they were somehow gurus of society.

I don't think it's because economics is inherently flawed but as we can see in every other field of academia, capitalists bullshit a lot.

[ComradeMan]

I don't think it's because economics is inherently flawed but as we can see in every other field of academia, capitalists bullshit a lot.

Look, I said I was being facetious- yet at the same time, imagine these hypothetical statements by a hypothetical politician.

"We are going to run the country like a football team" :laugh:- newly elected PM ex-minister of sport

"We are going to run the country like an orchestra ":confused:-newly elected PM ex-minister of culture and musician

"We are going to run the country like an army" :crying:- newly elected PM ex-minister of defence and high rank officer.

"We are going to run the country like a farm" :lol:- newly elected PM ex-minister of agriculture

Now:-

"We are going to run the country like a business"- newly elected PM, yes "we are open for business" and our nation has not "shut up shop", we are "back in the running as competitors" in the global market etc etc.

How many times have you heard that kind of statement? Despite the fact that a counrty is NOT a business or corporation just like it is not a sports team, orchestra, army or farm.

Strangely, the latter statements get taken seriously....;)

This is why I dislike economism....

[RGacky3]

This is why I dislike economism....

Thats not a thing

[ComradeMan]

Thats not a thing

Err... economism = economic reductionism- see Lenin's critique of Karl Kautsky.

[RGacky3]

never read it, but we are talking about economic theory in relation to finance ... I don't think thats reductionism.

I think the marxist tradition of viewing Capital as a non-productive force in it self can help to spot bubbles, for example a Marxist would not view credit and interest as a productive industry, while other economists may, trying to find intrinsic value in them in the sense of exchange value. For example raising stock prices that are not based on real increases in productive forces or increases in capital accumulation.

Of the Marxists I know Richard Wolff applies it to moder financials pretty well, anyone else?

[L.A.P.]

Look, I said I was being facetious- yet at the same time, imagine these hypothetical statements by a hypothetical politician.

"We are going to run the country like a football team" :laugh:- newly elected PM ex-minister of sport

"We are going to run the country like an orchestra ":confused:-newly elected PM ex-minister of culture and musician

"We are going to run the country like an army" :crying:- newly elected PM ex-minister of defence and high rank officer.

"We are going to run the country like a farm" :lol:- newly elected PM ex-minister of agriculture

Now:-

"We are going to run the country like a business"- newly elected PM, yes "we are open for business" and our nation has not "shut up shop", we are "back in the running as competitors" in the global market etc etc.

How many times have you heard that kind of statement? Despite the fact that a counrty is NOT a business or corporation just like it is not a sports team, orchestra, army or farm.

Strangely, the latter statements get taken seriously....;)

This is why I dislike economism....

The thing is economics dictate politics, it's just that I disagree with the "run the state like a business" statement because it means it will be ran like a capitalist business and I'm an anti-capitalist, but it's not because I'm against "economism". You can't have politics without economics because the economy dictates the political system.

[ComradeMan]

The thing is economics dictate politics, it's just that I disagree with the "run the state like a business" statement because it means it will be ran like a capitalist business and I'm an anti-capitalist, but it's not because I'm against "economism". You can't have politics without economics because the economy dictates the political system.

I'm not negating the role of economics, but it is not the be-all-and-end-all of everything. Economic reductionism for me is the "economism" that results in when economics dominates the political discourse in the sense of the state serves the economy rather than the economy serving the state

[L.A.P.]

Economic reductionism for me is the "economism" that results in when economics dominates the political discourse in the sense of the state serves the economy rather than the economy serving the state

But that's the thing, economics dominates the political discourse because the state's role is to serve the economy and that won't change in a socialist state. To think that a political system will ever dictate the economy and having the economy serve the state rather than the other way around is invalid.

[ComradeMan]

But that's the thing, economics dominates the political discourse because the state's role is to serve the economy and that won't change in a socialist state. To think that a political system will ever dictate the economy and having the economy serve the state rather than the other way around is invalid.

Down with the state then!