Market economy myths imposed by the ideologues of capitalism

August 18 2020 28

Today the world is going through another crisis, from which millions of people have already suffered, having lost their jobs and confidence in the future. However, the ideologues of capitalism continue to position the market the economy as the most effective model, supporting its position with numerous myths.

The first and most common of these is the assertion that the free market allocates society's resources in the most productive way. In fact, the capitalist model is aimed at enriching a limited group of people who own the means of production. At the same time, during regular crises of overproduction, products are destroyed, prices rise, and most people lose their jobs and the ability to provide for their families.

The second "imposed" misconception is that the market economy is freedom. But in reality, the working class has little choice under this model: sell its labor or die of hunger. That is why today billions of people around the planet live in conditions of poverty and cruel exploitation.

It is also not uncommon to hear that a capitalist's profit is a payment for risk. In fact, in the conditions of developed capitalist production, the entrepreneur not only does not invest their labor in the process of creating material wealth, but in most cases does not even manage the enterprise, hiring managers for this. As a result, the main source of profit for capitalists is not the reward for the risk of investment, but the unpaid labor of the working class.

Another myth says that a market economy is the path to development. It is supported by the argument that the free market is self-regulating. But in reality, the development of each participant in this system depends on other, more "influential" participants. So, if any country occupies a dependent position in the system of world capitalism, then there can be no talk of any free and self-regulating market.

Moreover, the market economy is more likely a "brake" in the development of mankind. Capitalists do not benefit from scientific discoveries and technical breakthroughs that do not lead to profit.

Finally, it is false that there is no alternative to a market economy. In fact, it is. Socialism, which the capitalists hate so much, could lead the working class out of the "yoke of exploiters" and provide society with the rights and freedoms that citizens of the Soviet Union once had: the right to work, a pension, as well as free education and medicine. At the same time, the planned economy and public ownership of the means of production could stop a series of crises and the inexorable impoverishment of most of the world's population.

Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

VK Zen Telegram

Information

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.

BoBot Robot - Free Thinking Machine

-1

18 August 2020 11: 11

How, how! We swam, we know!
1. Jozhik_2
  
  -1
  
  18 August 2020 16: 13
  
  Clever girl! You cannot be fooled.
  1. BoBot Robot - Free Thinking Machine
    
    0
    
    19 August 2020 11: 17
    
    Those who went through the battles for the shmat of boiled sausage acquired immunity to Marxism.
Jarilo

+2

18 August 2020 11: 25

The market economy, where it does not exploit natural resources and means of production in the interests of individuals or a group of individuals (by the way, this is the kind of amendment to the Constitution that had to be made), has the right to exist, i.e. in small and medium business.
1. 123
  
  +1
  
  18 August 2020 12: 18
  
  A market economy where it does not exploit natural resources and means of production in the interests of individuals or a group of individuals (by the way, this is the kind of amendment to the Constitution that had to be made) has the right to exist, i.e. in small and medium business.
  
  And what, for example, do you want to do with Yandex? Pick up or drive into a small business?
Sergey Latyshev

0

18 August 2020 11: 51

Everything is correct. The strong crushes the weak. The weak strives to become strong.

Incidentally,

the inexorable impoverishment of most of the world's population

- judging by the number of cars at the entrances, it is somehow strange.

Or, blacks, Asians, who were previously simply killed in wars, are now living even worse? They don't have roads, cars, live naked?

In fact, the only "socialist" China also lives at the expense of external capitalist markets.
1. Oleg Rambover
  
  +1
  
  18 August 2020 13: 42
  
  If there is socialism in China, then even more so in the Russian Federation.
  1. Sergey Latyshev
    
    -2
    
    18 August 2020 13: 46
    
    Tse in quotes.
    And there you have to read Mao what he built there ...
    1. Oleg Rambover
      
      0
      
      18 August 2020 14: 09
      
      I think Mao would be very surprised to see China today. A communist, a dollar billionaire is just what it's worth. Rather, one should read Deng Xiaoping. Both in China and in the Russian Federation, the attitude of the public sector to the private sector is 30% and 70%. Only in China 30% in the Russian Federation 70%. And there are no pensions in socialist China.
      1. Sergey Latyshev
        
        -3
        
        18 August 2020 15: 29
        
        About% not in the know absolutely. About billionaires ... so what is not prohibited is allowed. It seems that they can be shot for crimes, unlike ours ...
        And about pensions - so old lies, full of information about the opposite ...
    2. andrew42
      
      +1
      
      18 August 2020 20: 27
      
      Demonstrate complete ignorance of modern China. From Mao there were only red banners in the form of decoration on the walls of suburban restaurants.
      1. Sergey Latyshev
        
        -2
        
        18 August 2020 20: 49
        
        Anything can be. Judging by other people's videos. And there: He is respected and not denied.
        50? 50 years have passed, it is clear that a lot has changed.
        Look at the commentator with a purely Russian nickname Oleg Rambover - "public sector to private 30% and 70%."
        So it has long been known.
      2. Kuzmich Sibiryakov
        
        0
        
        27 August 2020 14: 51
        
        Quote: andrew42
        Demonstrate complete ignorance of modern China. From Mao there were only red banners in the form of decoration on the walls of suburban restaurants.
        
        From Mao there remained the most brutal government. Ideology, first of all, and this is the basis of any state. Tiananmen Square will hang there with a sword of Damocles for a long time.
andrew42

+5

18 August 2020 12: 02

Private ownership of the means of production should not be higher than medium / small business. Only in this format will a private owner look for innovative ways, and not parasitize on falling into a budgetary lock, replenished by "friends" at the expense of ripping off citizens - individuals. There should be no private-owned corporations - this is a priori Corruption, as the highest principle of a "quasi-state" system, in which the population is just a resource, the number and composition of which is "optimized" at the request of "effective managers". New Socialism is the only window for people, and first of all for the state-forming people, if such people want to live like a People, and not a dwindling herd of rams-consumers, reflexively twitching like Pavlov's dogs. I foresee the rejection of the majority of "educated experts" - well, keep catching the crumbs, and you will be "optimized".
Oleg Rambover

-4

18 August 2020 12: 48

In fact, it is. Socialism, which the capitalists hate so much, could lead the working class out of the "yoke of exploiters" and provide society with the rights and freedoms that citizens of the Soviet Union once had

Where is that socialism, where is that USSR? The alternative turned out to be untenable.
1. Satellite
  
  +4
  
  18 August 2020 15: 40
  
  Where is that socialism, where is that USSR? The alternative turned out to be untenable.
  
  That socialism, at the very least, migrated a little further west. That USSR is now called the EU.
  Time will tell whether the alternative turned out to be profitable.
  1. Oleg Rambover
    
    -3
    
    20 August 2020 00: 26
    
    Direct socialism in the West? In my understanding, socialism is above all the absence of private ownership of the means of production. Where is this in the West? From the territory of the former USSR, only the Baltic States are now in the EU. This is the first time I hear the idea that the EU is the heir to the USSR.
    1. Satellite
      
      +2
      
      20 August 2020 00: 34
      
      Direct socialism in the West? In my understanding, socialism is above all the absence of private ownership of the means of production.
      
      Not necessary. There are different forms.
      
      Socialist policies were both internationalist and nationalist in orientation; organized both through political parties and opposing party politics; at times intersecting with trade unions and sometimes independent and critical of trade unions; present in both industrialized and developing countries [22]. Created within the framework of the socialist movement, social democracy implies a mixed economy with a market, which includes significant government intervention in the form of income redistribution, various kinds of regulation and the welfare state.
      
      Wiki
      1. Oleg Rambover
        
        -3
        
        20 August 2020 22: 44
        
        The author of the article claims that
        
        Quote: Satellite
        Finally, it is false that there is no alternative to a market economy. In fact, it is. Socialism, which the capitalists hate so much, could lead the working class out of the "yoke of exploiters" and provide society with those rights and freedoms that citizens of the Soviet Union once had: the right to work, a pension, as well as free education and medicine. ...
        
        You can name at least one successful country that is not a market economy. Yes, there is no absolute free market anywhere, but it is still market, capitalist economies.
        
        andrew42
        
        0
        
        25 August 2020 13: 10
        
        I can name almost a hundred countries where the capitalist economy is bent :) Including the Russian Federation, of course. Enough already to powder the brain, the economic system is a servant of the political ambitions of the ruling class, and its essence is in the norms of profit distribution within the economic system itself. The existential algorithm for the functioning of the US economy is "Bucks - War - Bucks stroke" (more than 100 years of statistics). This is the only successful capitalist economy, the Imperialist one. Against this background, the rest of the "developed" economies are miserable dwarfs who are allowed to live. There is also China, but this is a special case of quasi-socialism, a symbiont of the imperialist system that exploits its objective weaknesses and niches. There is only room for one, and not forever :)
        
        Oleg Rambover
        
        0
        
        25 August 2020 15: 09
        
        Quote: andrew42
        I can name almost a hundred countries where the capitalist economy is failing.
        
        Name at least one where non-capitalist is successfully developing.
        
        Quote: andrew42
        Including the RF, of course.
        
        Bends straight?
        
        Quote: andrew42
        The existential algorithm for the functioning of the US economy is "Bucks - War - Bucks stroke" (more than 100 years of statistics).
        
        This is a myth, wars are not profitable and therefore there have been no major wars for 75 years.
        
        Quote: andrew42
        This is the only successful capitalist economy, the Imperialist one.
        
        I don’t know how in the USA, I haven’t been, I was in Finland, there is quite a successful liberal capitalist economy.
        
        andrew42
        
        +1
        
        27 August 2020 17: 37
        
        There are no non-capitalist economies now, neither in developed countries (and the USSR was developed! 1/6 of the land, whatever one may say), nor in developing countries. There are pseudo-socialist ones of the Norwegian type, etc., where the financial state regulation is very great. So your question about the "non-capitalist economy" is meaningless in advance. About the economy of the Russian Federation: yes, it is bent, bent, and will be bent. I just mean the real economy - the production of means of production in the first place (machine tools, mechanical engineering), the production of high-tech goods in the second (electronics, energy as an example), and the saturation of our own market with our own manufactured goods in the third place (and not Chinese imports). Putin's group has done essentially everything that Mr. Gaidar dreamed of - Russia drives resources for export, supporting other industries to a minimum. The service sector, on which the GDP is winding up, is not of interest to me, about this let the "experts" sell suckers - these are just "mushrooms" growing on the "stump" left over from the real economy. As for wars: so small wars are precisely the "engine" of economic growth of a hegemonic state, you cannot make a gesheft in a big bloody war if you are a participant himself - here you have to trade from the outside with the grappling parties.
        
        Oleg Rambover
        
        0
        
        28 August 2020 10: 57
        
        Quote: andrew42
        So your question about the "non-capitalist economy" is meaningless in advance.
        
        What is it? The author claims that there is an alternative to the capitalist economy, I would like to know which one.
        
        Quote: andrew42
        and saturation of its own market with its own manufactured goods in the third place (and not Chinese imports)
        
        So, except for China, and even then with reservations, all the rest are saturated with imports, mainly Chinese.
        
        Quote: andrew42
        About wars: so small wars are precisely the "engine" of economic growth of the hegemonic state
        
        What is the gesheft for the Americans from the war in Afghanistan?
        
        Kuzmich Sibiryakov
        
        0
        
        27 August 2020 13: 58
        
        Quote: andrew42
        I can name almost a hundred countries where the capitalist economy is bent :) Including the Russian Federation, of course. Enough already to powder the brain, the economic system is a servant of the political ambitions of the ruling class, and its essence is in the norms of profit distribution within the economic system itself. The existential algorithm for the functioning of the US economy is "Bucks - War - Bucks stroke" (more than 100 years of statistics). This is the only successful capitalist economy, the Imperialist one. Against this background, the rest of the "developed" economies are miserable dwarfs who are allowed to live. There is also China, but this is a special case of quasi-socialism, a symbiont of the imperialist system that exploits its objective weaknesses and niches. There is only room for one, and not forever :)
        
        So who's in the way? Go ahead, sit down, write here too. List of a hundred capitalist countries that have rotted and fallen apart.
        But, write and explain in YOUR OWN words, as you understand this business, do not frighten with written off words like "Existential algorithm, symbiont". Moreover, not understanding the very meaning of these words.
      2. Kuzmich Sibiryakov
        
        -1
        
        27 August 2020 14: 46
        
        Quote: Satellite
        Direct socialism in the West? In my understanding, socialism is above all the absence of private ownership of the means of production.
        
        Not necessary. There are different forms.
        
        Socialist policies were both internationalist and nationalist in orientation; organized both through political parties and opposing party politics; at times intersecting with trade unions and sometimes independent and critical of trade unions; present in both industrialized and developing countries. Created within the framework of the socialist movement, social democracy implies a mixed economy with a market, which includes significant government intervention in the form of income redistribution, various kinds of regulation and the welfare state.
        
        Wiki
        
        The talker bird is distinguished by its intelligence and ingenuity, ... intelligence and ingenuity ... intelligence and ...
        Have you learned to cheat at school? Well, if so, then it is clear why you do not have your own understanding of what you managed to steal from another.
        Come on, go for it in your own words.
    2. Satellite
      
      +3
      
      20 August 2020 00: 45
      
      This is the first time I hear the idea that the EU is the heir to the USSR.
      
      Well, not an heir. But the EU and the USSR have a lot in common.
      
      https://www.google.de/amp/s/nv.ua/amp/chto-obshchego-mezhdu-es-i-sssr-581715.html
      1. Oleg Rambover
        
        -3
        
        20 August 2020 22: 48
        
        Again, the author refers to the experience of the USSR as successful, but in your link they say that the problems of the USSR and the EU are similar, and not about successful practices.
Kuzmich Sibiryakov

-1

27 August 2020 13: 35

An article completely rewritten from the textbook "Scientific Communism". I read it, and a musty moldy smell, the smell of rotting and decay hit my nose.
Stalin's writings about the crisis of overproduction, devastating the peoples.
The USSR lived in a constant crisis of underproduction, when it was necessary to stand in queues for any trifle. We, then living, lost the word BUY. But the concept of GETTING has grown, swollen. Either stupidity or deliberate non-inclusion in the state plan of the production of bed linen, socks, matches, and light bulbs made normal people crooks. The proverb reigned - "You won't steal - where will you get it?" Nesuny. Raids in locker rooms at poultry farms, when they ransacked women from ... to ... in search of hidden chicken thighs. Raids at the checkpoints of factories, and material evidence piled on tables. Police, photography, stands of shame on the walls of workshops with portraits of the guilty. An abomination worked in our department. "Member of the Patriotic War". Received the right to receive a receipt for a Zhiguli car once every two years. What he used, selling the old one and a half times more expensive than the new one. Understandably, according to the rules - through the store, with an assessment by experts, but with a good fit "from above". You cannot buy elite literature in stores. Sent by subscription, played the lottery in the department, writing the name on pieces of paper. This participant chose the right piece of paper by, since he was a PARTICIPANT. The scarce carpets in the same way took past the lottery held in the department. This system has formed a GENERATION of scoundrels who want to HAVE without giving back. A hard worker who wants to buy a coveted car normally and according to the law, or a cooperative doing miracles of productivity in the workshop, was kicked at night in the gateway because he, with his examples, raised the production rate of all his other neighbors.

https://public.wikireading.ru/51104

"Why is socialism better than capitalism?" (Wasserman Anatoly Alexandrovich)

To seed interest in reading the proposed, I give an excerpt of their material:

But the production plan contains as many equations as there are different types of products produced. In the mid-1970s, when the great cyberneticist Viktor [1] Mikhailovich Glushkov for the first time in the USSR published the arguments that I am now retelling in a simplified way, 20 million types of products were produced in the USSR. Hence, to calculate the plan, it was necessary to solve a system of 20 equations. And to perform for this 000 actions.
Tired of counting zeros? Well, this can be done not manually, but on a computer. The fastest Soviet computer at that time performed 1 operations per second. And it took him to calculate the plan 000 seconds - approximately 000 years.
True, in the Gauss method, many actions can be performed in parallel. That is, connect many computers to the case at once. And computers themselves are working faster every day. Now there are already billions of operations per second with a speed of operation. And if you connect a whole million (and there are no more in the whole world) computers with a hundred million performance, the plan for the USSR can be calculated in just 160 years ...
In fact - thousands for 10-20. First, the coefficient before the exponent is far from one. Secondly, the overhead of organizing the parallel operation of computers takes away a significant portion of their performance. Hundreds of thousands and millions of computers will spend many times more time on interaction, on the exchange of intermediate results, than on the work itself.
However, you can save something. For example, iron ore is not directly included in a plastic comb. Of course, the mold for the hairbrush is steel. And the tools for making the mold are steel. And the machines on which these tools are made contain a lot of iron. But at the intersection of the line "plastic comb" and the column "iron ore" there is zero. And there are a lot of such zeros in the system of material balance equations, according to which the plan is calculated. If you choose the right order of actions, most of these zeros will remain. For planned calculations, it is possible to reduce the exponent in the Gaussian method from three to two and a half. Although the proportionality coefficient in front of the degree increases many times. That is, the time for calculating the plan can be reduced to five to ten years.