What is uneconomic under capitalism does not become economic under socialism.

Barry Brooks durable at earthlink.net
Fri Dec 13 10:32:40 MST 2002

Mark wrote:
What is uneconomic under capitalism does not become
economic under socialism. This is such a basic fact,
and yet its significance eludes people almost entirely.
All known schemes for alternative forms of energy, that
is, all plans for an alternative to the petroleate
society, involve moving from a richer to a poorer
energy environment, from a less to a more labour-intensive world. It is pure
wishful thinking to suppose  that 'socialist technology' will solve the problem
today, any more than it did in the Soviet 1930s.

Why would one expect there to be no difference in what
is uneconomic when the capitalism needs a profit and
socialism doesn't.

Both systems do need to have functional investments,
but they have different definitions of functional.

Even a perpetual motion machine could be economic in a socialist economy. And,
the arts can flourish, etc. so long as basic production, maintenance,
stewardship are being cared for.  If it is popular and is choosen over any
competing uses of its inputs then any project is the right thing to do.
Personal short-term profit can and should be left out of non-personal investment

The market is useful, but the without the need for profit the market would be a
different beast.  Let's not let the tail wag the dog.  With socialism the market
can be a useful tool instead of being a destructive dictator.

We have seen what the right thing to do leads to with profit as a guide.  Who
believes that the capitalist market makes good decisions?  Good for whom?


PLEASE clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.

More information about the Marxism mailing list