political oppisition can't relly work in a communist state anyway becuse nobody wants to change anything, right?

lol @ inkus's attempt to have an economic crisis theory

capitalists do not lower their prices too low because then they dont get that much profit even if they sell a lot of shtuff

they dont lower their wages too much because then the workers will not be able to work as hard or as much

marx explained all of this.

the only true crisis theory is the tendency of the rate of profit to fall

it pisses me off when people make up bullshit economical crap

i think im the only one on this forum who understands the tendecy of the rate of profit to fall. how can you be a marxist without understanding it. i know mark doesnt understand it but still he claims to be a marxist. ridiculous.

I have never in my entier life seen suce ignorance.......

matt how did i compare capitalists to imperialistic lords?

sory for not responding i didnt see it. unlike you i have pepol talking to me in every thred so sometimes i dont get to everything.

LOLOLOLOL.

read marx's wage labor and capital, the chapter called by what are wages determined.

it says the opposite of you. you say competition makes wages fal. he say it makes it rise.

because supply and demand. when capital accumulates, theres more demand for labor so the capialists compete for hiring pepul and raise there prices.


lol at equality crisis causing tendecny of rate of profit to fal. marx invented the tendency of the rate of profit to fall. who am i gonna trust on what it is- you or him?

its cause by the decrease of the ratio of variable capital to constant capital, also knone as the organic composition of capital.

although the tendency of the rate of profit to fall means nothing. because its just the rate of profit, not the amount of profit.

dud. the capitalists wil try to pay lower so al wil go to the lowest wage place. so the wage wil increse everywhere because the demand increses universally. if there is one place wher the wage is lower then the captialists wil go ther and increse it by competition.

I REPET THE FAILLING RAT OF PORFIT DOESNT MEAN PORFIT FALLS - IT MEANS RAT OF PORFIT FALS.

actually the porfits wil continue to increse just they wont increase as fast. the real reason for cirsis is because of luxemburgs economics thoery.

what you all ignore is that company owners are human and aren't just thinking about profit, when buisness is good workers usally get a bigger pay check becuse the owner/manager is a human you all asume that managers are evil demones who live on cash but not real pepole.

I mosl leykly assume none of you has a very good job becuse with your opinions to managers and owners you'll get fierd pertty quikly.

First you say this...

mattabesta wrote:

what you all ignore is that company owners are human and aren't just thinking about profit, when buisness is good workers usally get a bigger pay check becuse the owner/manager is a human you all asume that managers are evil demones who live on cash but not real pepole.

Then you say this...?

Quote:

I mosl leykly assume none of you has a very good job becuse with your opinions to managers and owners you'll get fierd pertty quikly.

Sometimes your logic (or lack there or) astounds me. We're well aware that they are people too. And i, myself, do not necessarily blame owners of big corporations since they are, more so than not, a product of society. That's why we think society must be completely reconstructed with the well being of all in mind, rather than the well being of some at the expense of others.

You defend these bourgeois because they are not just after profits, but that isn't a good enough reason to keep capitalism around. And if these people really cared about people, and not merely profits, this world would be a much nicer place to live in. I can only assume that your comfortable, isolated life has led you to the conlusion that there's nothing wrong with the way things are. This is obviously wrong. Some countries live very comfortably, but there are still plenty others with massive famine and hunger problems, disease epidemics, and dominating authorities controlling many, if not every aspect of their lives.

_________________
"A market economy must comprise all elements of industry including labor, land and money [...] But labor and land are no other than the human beings themselves of which every society consists and the natural surroundings in which it exists. To include them in the market mechanism means to subordinate the substance of society itself."
--Karl Polanyi--

It really depends on what your standards are as far as goals. Based on the theoretical works of the people who lead the October Revolution and then lead the country up to it's now Capitalist system (namely Vladimir Lenin and Josef Stalin respectively), the goal was a Communist society. No classes, no state apparatus, the means of production in the hands of the people, and in this case the hands of the Soviet (workers' council) democracy. It's obvious that if these are considered the goal, then the USSR failed rather miserably.

Like I said, it's really contextual as to what you qualify as success. Did it improve Russia? Sure, Stalin encouraged massive industrialization and gave the USSR a powerhouse economy, and this economy was based on (at least) vaguely Socialist principles. But of course, this isn't Communism in the slightest -- industrialization is positive and develops the country for Communism (if I remember correctly Imperialist Russia was harshly underdeveloped, thus Lenin's extensive interest in the subject throughout his life and work).

So, was it a success in the sense like Liche said, if you compare Russia before the revolution, after the revolution, and after the fall of the revolution, then improvement is widespread and the Soviet revolution was a 'success' in that respect.

But was it a success in the sense of what the goal was in 1917, when Lenin wrote the State and Revolution and the October Revolution sparked off? Of course not. Not even close.

It was capitalist plain and simple. It had al the characteristics, priviate porpirty, surplus value, capital, rapid development of productive forces,etc

The only real good thing about USSR is that it was good in economy and helped fight Hitler (Even though Hitler was a ***** in military strategies)...and the negatives are too many to discuss.