• naevaTheRat@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    You should not confuse capitalism with markets, and you should not confuse markets with working together.

    Consider the family unit, it is doubtful that everyone cooks their own single serve or rotates meal duty evenly. Humans can specialise without capital.

    Capital is what enables someone to have someone else cook for them, who then has to go cook their own meal. The one with capital isn’t even doing anything for the cook, they are simply taking money that someone working at a widgt factory they own made and giving it to the cook. In so doing they appropriate both the widget factory worker’s meal and the cooks!

    you can even have market exchange without capitalism. In the above situation if we remove the capitalist the widget maker could give the cook widgets for a meal. Or even currency from selling widgets for a meal. Materially the capitalist contributes nothing, their role is entirely created by private property law.

    • Krafty Kactus@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 months ago

      I may have misread the end of your comment but are you implying that a market can exist without private property?

      • J Lou@mastodon.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        A market can exist without private property by having capital be collectively owned and continuously up for auction to the highest bidder. Basically, each holder of means of production self-assess the price at which they would be willing to turn over that capital to another party, they pay a lease payment based on a percentage of that self-assessed price, and if someone comes along willing to pay that self-assessed price, require that they turn it over to that party

          • J Lou@mastodon.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            10 months ago

            In what I described, the differences are:

            1. Buyers can compel current holders to transfer the asset to them if they pay enough. This reduces the power of capital holders.
            2. All self-assessed prices of all capital are public
            3. A large portion of the value of capital flows into a collective fund

            @microblogmemes