Re: [Pen-l] What is the Crisis About? Fictitious Capital or the Destruction ...

[Waistline2@xxxxxxx]

In a message dated 3/12/2009 8:58:01 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, michael@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx writes:

Yes.  And the decoupling is a very important component.

Anthony D'Costa wrote:
> Traditionally wealth was always defined in terms of tangible assets,
> gold for example.  While the value of gold or for that matter machines
> may change nevertheless they are nothing like paper wealth (or
> fictitious capital), though I have to admit that these days all that
> is solid also melts into thin air.  In fact when we talk about
> financial sphere are we not really talking about stock market (though
> there are other elements to this)?  After all the speculative element
> in stock markets tends to decouple stock market valuation
> substantially from initial paid up capital.  Is this not the emergence
> of fictitious capital, which reproduces itself in capitalist
> expansionary phase?  From this angle it seems the Indian billionaires
> have lost FC not wealth.
>
>


--

Comment

 

FC is a form of wealth. Perhaps valueless wealth, but a form of wealth with real convertibility into material things. All wealth seems to contains a historically distinctive form as a primary "form of wealth," in different epochs.  

 

WL.

---

Need a job? Find employment help in your area.

_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
pen-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l