anclondon at gn.apc.org
Mon Jan 16 00:37:44 MST 1995
The problem is that we live in a real world. There are real problems of , philosophy, of which car to buy or not to buy a car at all, or not even having the money to pay the bus fare, poverty, wars, etc.
These problems need solutions. We find solutions. Not because they are absolute, or relative, right or wrong, but because we have to have solutions on a time scale shorter than infinity.
I find Chris's plea relevant. Let us discuss. There is in fact no "Final Solution" al la Hitler, or Stalin.
How do we find the most satisfactory solution to the particulat problem. I submit that for example the measure of the efficiency of the market place, has no absolute solution. There is only a solution which satisfies the people who run the market at a particular time.
If the market is run by capitalists it does not satisfy the majority ( certainly not the third world), if it is run by minimising the labour power it likewise did not seem to satisfy the majority (USSR).
However could the efficiency of the market be assessed ( at a particular time, in a rough sort of way, relative and randomly varying but between limits), by a consensus of the majority.
This would result in a tendency to minimise the labour power needed. ( The majority of people directly involved in the market are workers). It would also tend to make the financial costs minimal ( this would asuage the consumers desires). Then there are to environmentalists, the third world suppliers, the ......
This seems an impossible way of reaching a position of being able to assess the efficiency of the market. However if one looks at the way the efficiency of a market is in practice arrived at at the present time, all these forces do influence the measure of efficiency. The problem is that the measure MONEY is given too much weight, and LABOUR too little.
My submission is that Labour should be the basis of the measure of efficiency but it must be mediated or moderated by the impact of consumer, environmemtalist, ... opinions.
Likewise in the very erudite discussions, which I just manage to follow, I agree with points elabourated by all the participants. I do find it difficult to determine which particular problem is being solved.
The games a foot. I don't like the rules. But I must participate and win. It is the game of life. I may have to break the rules now and then especially when the ref is not looking, but then again that is one of the rules of the game.
If you win you can have a big party when everyone is invited, Not like last time when we lost and only the ref and their team manager and captain were invited. And not like the time we won in the preliminaries when only the team celebrated and the supporters were left out in the cold.
More information about the Marxism