Log in

View Full Version : Equality of poverty: "under capitalism"?



Die Neue Zeit
20th October 2012, 07:58
Caught a reference to this FT article on Libcom, so I thought to repost it:

http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/78e883fa-0bef-11e2-8032-00144feabdc0.html#axzz29osnKT8B


Prof Gordon notes further obstacles to rising standards of living for ordinary Americans. These include: the reversal of the demographic dividend that came from the baby boomers and movement of women into the labour force; the levelling-off of educational attainment; and obstacles to the living standards of the bottom 99 per cent. These hurdles include globalisation, rising resource costs and high fiscal deficits and private debts. In brief, he expects the rise in the real disposable incomes of those outside the elite to slow to a crawl. Indeed, it appears to have already done so. Similar developments are occurring in other high-income countries.

For almost two centuries, today’s high-income countries enjoyed waves of innovation that made them both far more prosperous than before and far more powerful than everybody else. This was the world of the American dream and American exceptionalism. Now innovation is slow and economic catch-up fast. The elites of the high-income countries quite like this new world. The rest of their population like it vastly less. Get used to this. It will not change.

Without overblowing things by going into crisis theory stuff, what can be said about this equality of poverty "under capitalism" itself (and so much for Churchill)?

[I'm placing this here and not in Economics because there might be a controversial political angle to raise later on about comparing this to "socialist stagnation."]

doesn't even make sense
20th October 2012, 15:12
Get used to this. It will not change.

:laugh: Unless you're talking about some mathematical constant that's a losing bet if I've ever heard one.



I was actually thinking of something similar the other day. It seems like capitalism has exhausted all the low and mid hanging fruit by now and that has serious implications for overall profitability. Not only have so many advances been made, but with the accumulated capacity and know-how of all the past industrial breakthroughs it seems like it takes far less time for a new market to run its course. I was thinking what big opportunities were on the horizon for capitalists to sink their capital into and I couldn't come up with much besides a potential quantum computing revolution and rebuilding/adapting infrastructure under threat of ecological disaster. Maybe a new generation of iPhone every few months will keep the wheels turning?

Lynx
20th October 2012, 15:12
This presumes that capitalism will sputter along, delivering diminished expectations, rather than go through another crash/rebirth cycle.

We've had equality of poverty since antiquity.

doesn't even make sense
20th October 2012, 15:13
This presumes that capitalism will sputter along, delivering diminished expectations, rather than go through another crash/rebirth cycle.

And realistically, how much more of that can the system survive? It's starting to look pretty socialism or barbarism out there.

Positivist
20th October 2012, 15:47
The declining standard of living in the developed world is certainly an interesting development but we should not overestimate its implications for the global collapse of capital, and rather need to recognize it as an issue of development. The developed countries, are, well, developed leading little room for profitability whereas much of the "third world" remains in utter destitution offering an opportunity for capital investment. Furthermore, North Atlantic wages are declining while they have doubled in the past year alone in China. It appears that the amerifan dream is the latest export, but as scarce and delicate as it is, don't expect Bangladesh to begin to resmeble massachusettes and Massachusetts Bangladesh. What is likely, and what now appears to he unfolding is the leveling out of wealth relation globally.

Fortunately this phenomenon also presents an opportunity for revolutionary leftism. As the now developing world develops, proletarians will have more time to reflect on their plight and begin to seek out solutions to ammend it, while in the staganating developed world their will be greater plight to reflect upon. In globalization rests the greatest contradiction, with that original divide between bourgiose and proletariat being realized and expanded on an unprecendented scale.

Zealot
20th October 2012, 16:54
This sounds similar to the analysis made by Richard Wolff and Stephen Resnick regarding the onset of the financial crisis. But I don't know how true it would be to say that "it will not change" since things could be reset by, for example, another world war.

Die Neue Zeit
24th October 2012, 14:48
To the point, let's compare two social contract models (sarcastically), shall we?

Real wage depression, consumer indebtedness, social wage insufficiency, job insecurity and precarity, all things equality of poverty already "under capitalism," concentration of elite wealth, freedom of moneyed speech, all things panopticon society (surveillance, "dataveillance," etc.), under-developed civil society, etc.

Vs.

Real wage increases, no consumer indebtedness, social wage sufficiency / generous welfare, guaranteed job whether at same workplace or no ("fully socialized" labour market for the latter), freedom to make private jokes or snides about the government without using means of telecommunication (much less social media), civil society freedom to expose specific officials for scandal ("people's control"), but generally "if you shut up, don’t ask for more rights and accept the rule of the [non-totalitarian] bureaucracy then we will supply you with consumer goods" (Boris Kagarlitsky).