What is this binary economics? Increasingly about it hears begin to refer to it the politicians, but ordinary passerby zagadnięty for it would at most a silly face.
This view of the economy based on the assumption that – apart from the land – the two most important factors of production are capital and labor. And on the observation that the relationship between changes at the expense of jobs as a result of technological progress. In other words, an increasing part of economic development generates capital, less and less work. Thus, the falling value of the work, which translates into lower wages and higher incomes of those who are holders of capital.
But technological progress creates more jobs – and more valuable – than destroys.
This traditional belief espoused by economists. Yes indeed it was the case. In the nineteenth century. However, there are indications that currently can not be otherwise. Interestingly, Louis Kelso, an American, who created the economy of binary, born in 1913. His youth coincided with the times of the Great Depression – and therefore seen the endless queue of the unemployed – and wondering to why all this is heading, came to conclusion that, paradoxically, it is the lack of work is ideal, which should aim at humanity.
No work?
Yes. Kelso saw in automation chance, that man did not have to work so hard. The work of man – for the benefit of the world – would replace the machine. Then we could have more to devote to higher things: family, art, science. Note that this is the time off work is a necessary condition for progress. If the cave man did not begin to draw on the walls cave in free time, and only hunted mammoths, we are never out of this cave that we did not come out.
So we should be happy, because people free time – according to all the research – arrives. Formerly worked over 70 hours a week, now – 40 hours.
That’s true, but the second prerequisite for the development, which makes the free time is used well, and it is not wasted, the adaptation of society to changes in relations capital – work.
the smell of Marx.
Because Kelso to Marx inspired. Even wrote an article entitled “Karl Marx: almost capitalist.” Marks, if you read it honestly, he was not opposed to private ownership per se, but rather a specific extreme forms of private property. Marx socialized ownership does not necessarily mean ownership of common property but distracted, which is part of each. In this context, these two concepts – labor and capital – are not antagonistic, they co-exist in symbiosis. We will not stop automation, so you’ll need to intelligently adapt to her work. Without this mass production increasing as a result of automation will not encounter sufficient demand. When people do not have what you consume, the economy becomes.
Location however, is the assumption that the concentration of capital is bad? Is not it a condition of investment and reward for market success?
Concentrated capital can serve as capital investment, but in a situation such as now, when the capital belongs to a limited number of people , it tends to remain. Kelso said about the capital that is sterile. Kept it accumulates, passes to the heirs, but it does not work. And it should.
How is it? After all capital deposited, eg. On accounts, support lending and so was investment.
there are still 76% of the content
Dear reader,
At the moment are logged in , but you do not have access to paid content.
No comments:
Post a Comment