I don't dislike Marx, and I think that many of his ideas resonate today, some in a quaint outmoded way, others accurate still. However, Marx was a man of his time and situation. Many of his ideas are so fundamentally flawed, particularly as gross overgeneralizations, that it is astonishing to me that many adherents still are willing to run will-nilly with these ideas.
In the interest of brevity (because this capitalist must soon go back to work exploiting labor ;-) ), I will focus on your paragraph 3 above. In this scenario, the ever-persistent class divide forces the situation to be expressed in terms of the capitalist(s) and the labor. What if...the enterprise in question is a brewery? What if the capital contributions were shared, combined with the distribution of ownership as compensation for labor value. Now, everyone is an owner (capitalist) and labor simultaneously. They all agree to self-exploit, as they must, to generate profit in excess of their labor value. Whether to reinvest (hence becoming unprofitable again) to drive growth (we need to buy more malt, hops, vats and hire more labor/dilute ownership), or simply distribute the excess capital (dividends!), all are in the same boat. Yet, the business entity itself operates to the rest of the market with its internal capital structure invisible i.e. it is not directly relevant to how the company actually operates.
Marx was conditioned by his time to such an extent, that he could not practically see this scenario, so most of his theory is harmed by his uncompromising views of class structure.
That's one example. Last for now: I agree with much of what you said about interest rates (not all), of course labor can/is/will be exploited and that's a bad thing, labor need not be exploited though to operate a market economy efficiently.
Would be fun to chat in person one day, good topics.
I don't dislike Marx, and I think that many of his ideas resonate today, some in a quaint outmoded way, others accurate still. However, Marx was a man of his time and situation. Many of his ideas are so fundamentally flawed, particularly as gross overgeneralizations, that it is astonishing to me that many adherents still are willing to run will-nilly with these ideas.
In the interest of brevity (because this capitalist must soon go back to work exploiting labor ;-) ), I will focus on your paragraph 3 above. In this scenario, the ever-persistent class divide forces the situation to be expressed in terms of the capitalist(s) and the labor. What if...the enterprise in question is a brewery? What if the capital contributions were shared, combined with the distribution of ownership as compensation for labor value. Now, everyone is an owner (capitalist) and labor simultaneously. They all agree to self-exploit, as they must, to generate profit in excess of their labor value. Whether to reinvest (hence becoming unprofitable again) to drive growth (we need to buy more malt, hops, vats and hire more labor/dilute ownership), or simply distribute the excess capital (dividends!), all are in the same boat. Yet, the business entity itself operates to the rest of the market with its internal capital structure invisible i.e. it is not directly relevant to how the company actually operates.
Marx was conditioned by his time to such an extent, that he could not practically see this scenario, so most of his theory is harmed by his uncompromising views of class structure.
That's one example. Last for now: I agree with much of what you said about interest rates (not all), of course labor can/is/will be exploited and that's a bad thing, labor need not be exploited though to operate a market economy efficiently.
Would be fun to chat in person one day, good topics.