[Marxism] Re: The Meaning of Surplus Capital

["Calvin Broadbent" <calvinbroadbent@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi,

I found this comment of Jurriaan's very clever and suggestive. I apologise
in advance if this question is badly posed, but do you think, Jurriaan, that
the decay of the productive capacity of capital in the contemporary period
has in any way translated into a lack of *funding* for the development of
the (natural) sciences? Has the narrow specialisation and isolation of
scientific endeavour actually regressed to the point where government
expediture in the scientific fields is ever-decreasing? Or, has the opposite
in fact occurred, where the educational budgets of Imperial governments are
increasingly geared towards scientific advance (at any rate in the natural
sciences)?

all the best.


JURRIAAN BENDIEN WROTE:

In reality, there is no real "economic crisis", only a misallocation of
capital, from an economic perspective. The only "crisis" there is, is the
crisis
affecting the poor. The central question of bourgeois ideology is no longer
one
of "how to expand outputs", but "who
deserves credit". There you have the material basis, of the shift from
modernism to post-modernism.

_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself with cool new emoticons http://www.msn.co.uk/specials/myemo


_______________________________________________
Marxism mailing list
Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism