Re: [OPE-L] fully automated economy and capitalism

[Dave Zachariah <davez@xxxxxx>]

Hi Jerry,

In Paul C's thought experiment, one can hypothesize that a quantity
analogous to labour content emerges as the basis of economic value.

If there is a scarce and universal quantity that constrains production
and the feasible consumption pattern --- and if the economy works with
some degree of efficiency --- then this quantity will emerge as a
regulating force on the prices of commodities.

//Dave Z


on 2007-11-28 15:14 GERALD LEVY wrote:
>     Hi Paul C:
>
>
>
>     How are you defining 'profit' and the 'rate of profit' below?
>
>
>
>     If we take the  formula s/c+v  to be the rate of profit, in a
>
>     fully automated economy v = 0 and this implies that s =
>
>     0 unless you think that c can create surplus value.
>
>
>
>     I suppose one could define 'surplus' (NB: as distinct from
>
>     'surplus value') in a different way,  such that it could exist in
>
>     your fully automated society.  But, it would be difficult
>
>     because in pre-capitalist (or post-capitalist) societies a surplus
>
>     refers to an amount of the total product produced beyond the
>
>     necessary reproductive requirements  of the direct producers.
>
>     But,   there are no direct producers in a fully automated society
>
>     unless you take the robots to be the 'producers'.   [If so, then
>
>     the (non-labor) costs associated with maintaining and
>
>     reproducing the robots could be seen as 'socially necessary'
>
>     and a pre-requisite for the reproduction of the system.]
>
>
>
>     Who would be consuming the output, you ask? Well,
>
>     I guess that would be the human (or non-human) parasites
>
>     who live off of the product produced by the robots,
>
>     right?
>
>
>
>     What any of this has to do with real economies is unclear
>
>     to me. I don't think such an abstract, ahistorical model  has
>
>     *anything* meaningful to say about capitalism.
>
>
>
>     In solidarity, Jerry
>
>
>
>     ------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>     I agree that without wage labour you could not speak of capitalism
>     in the normal sense, but
>
>     That does not follow that all prices would be zero, since the
>     firms might still be
>
>     Aiming to maximise profit.
>
>
>
>     More unclear would be who or what was consuming the output?
>
>
>
>     One could assume all was reinvested and the rate of profit would
>     then the the rate of growth as analyzed by von Neumann