Sign in with Facebook
Rudolph Hiferding’s Followers
None yet.
Rudolph Hiferding
|
Finance Capital: A study in the latest phase of capitalist development (Economic History)
|
|
* Note: these are all the books on Goodreads for this author. To add more, click here.
“Exchange is thus accessible to analysis because it not only satisfies
individual needs, but is also a social necessity which makes individual
need its instrument while at the same time limiting its satisfaction.
For a need can be satisfied only to the extent that social necessity
will permit. It is of course a presupposition, for human society is
inconceivable without the satisfaction of individual needs. This does
not mean, however, that exchange is simply a function of individual
need, as indeed it would be in a collectivist economy, but that
individual needs are satisfied only to the extent that exchange allows
them to participate in the product of society. It is this participation
which determines exchange. The latter appears to be simply a
quantitative ratio between two things,[4] <#n4> which is determined when
this quantity is determined. The quantity which is turned over in
exchange, however, counts only as a part of social production, which
itself is quantitatively determined by the labour time that society
assigns to it. Society is here conceived as an entity which employs its
collective labour power to produce the total output, while the
individual and his labour power count only as organs of that society. In
that role, the individual shares in the product to the extent that his
own labour power participates, on average, in the total labour power
(assuming the intensity and productivity of labour to be fixed). If he
works too slowly or if his work produces something useless (an otherwise
useful article would be considered useless if it constituted an excess
of goods in circulation), his labour power is scaled down to average
labour time, i.e. socially necessary labour time. The aggregate labour
time for the total product, once given, must therefore find expression
in exchange. In its simplest form, this happens when the quantitative
ratios between goods exchanged correspond to the quantitative ratios of
the socially necessary labour time expended in their production.
Commodities would in that case exchange at their values.”
― Finance Capital: A study in the latest phase of capitalist development
individual needs, but is also a social necessity which makes individual
need its instrument while at the same time limiting its satisfaction.
For a need can be satisfied only to the extent that social necessity
will permit. It is of course a presupposition, for human society is
inconceivable without the satisfaction of individual needs. This does
not mean, however, that exchange is simply a function of individual
need, as indeed it would be in a collectivist economy, but that
individual needs are satisfied only to the extent that exchange allows
them to participate in the product of society. It is this participation
which determines exchange. The latter appears to be simply a
quantitative ratio between two things,[4] <#n4> which is determined when
this quantity is determined. The quantity which is turned over in
exchange, however, counts only as a part of social production, which
itself is quantitatively determined by the labour time that society
assigns to it. Society is here conceived as an entity which employs its
collective labour power to produce the total output, while the
individual and his labour power count only as organs of that society. In
that role, the individual shares in the product to the extent that his
own labour power participates, on average, in the total labour power
(assuming the intensity and productivity of labour to be fixed). If he
works too slowly or if his work produces something useless (an otherwise
useful article would be considered useless if it constituted an excess
of goods in circulation), his labour power is scaled down to average
labour time, i.e. socially necessary labour time. The aggregate labour
time for the total product, once given, must therefore find expression
in exchange. In its simplest form, this happens when the quantitative
ratios between goods exchanged correspond to the quantitative ratios of
the socially necessary labour time expended in their production.
Commodities would in that case exchange at their values.”
― Finance Capital: A study in the latest phase of capitalist development
“The social activity of
commodities on the market is to capitalist society what collective
intelligence is to a socialist society.”
― Finance Capital: A study in the latest phase of capitalist development
commodities on the market is to capitalist society what collective
intelligence is to a socialist society.”
― Finance Capital: A study in the latest phase of capitalist development
“One thing is clear; namely, that since the periodic recurrence of crises
is a product of capitalist society, the causes must lie in the nature of
capital. It must be a matter of a disturbance arising from the specific
character of society. The narrow basis provided by the consumption
relations of capitalist production constitutes, from that point of view,
the general condition of crises, since the impossibility of enlarging
this basis is the precondition for the stagnation of the market. If
consumption could be readily expanded, overproduction would not be
possible. But under capitalist conditions expansion of consumption means
a reduction in the rate of profit. For an increase in consumption by the
broad masses of the population depends upon a rise in wages, which would
reduce the rate of surplus value and hence the rate of profit.
Consequently, if the demand for labour, as a result of the accumulation
of capital, increases so greatly that the rate of profit is reduced, to
a point (at the extreme) where an increased quantity of capital would
not produce a larger profit than did the original capital, then
accumulation must come to an end, since its essential purpose - the
increase of profit - would not be achieved. This is the point at which
one necessary precondition of accumulation, the expansion of
consumption, enters into contradiction with another precondition, namely
the realization of profit. The conditions of realization cannot be
reconciled with the expansion of consumption, and since the former are
decisive, the contradiction develops into a crisis. That is why the
narrow basis of consumption is only a general condition of crises, which
cannot be explained simply by 'underconsumption'. Least of all can the
periodic character of crises be explained in this way, since no periodic
phenomenon can be explained by constant conditions.
[pp. 241-242]”
― Finance Capital: A study in the latest phase of capitalist development
is a product of capitalist society, the causes must lie in the nature of
capital. It must be a matter of a disturbance arising from the specific
character of society. The narrow basis provided by the consumption
relations of capitalist production constitutes, from that point of view,
the general condition of crises, since the impossibility of enlarging
this basis is the precondition for the stagnation of the market. If
consumption could be readily expanded, overproduction would not be
possible. But under capitalist conditions expansion of consumption means
a reduction in the rate of profit. For an increase in consumption by the
broad masses of the population depends upon a rise in wages, which would
reduce the rate of surplus value and hence the rate of profit.
Consequently, if the demand for labour, as a result of the accumulation
of capital, increases so greatly that the rate of profit is reduced, to
a point (at the extreme) where an increased quantity of capital would
not produce a larger profit than did the original capital, then
accumulation must come to an end, since its essential purpose - the
increase of profit - would not be achieved. This is the point at which
one necessary precondition of accumulation, the expansion of
consumption, enters into contradiction with another precondition, namely
the realization of profit. The conditions of realization cannot be
reconciled with the expansion of consumption, and since the former are
decisive, the contradiction develops into a crisis. That is why the
narrow basis of consumption is only a general condition of crises, which
cannot be explained simply by 'underconsumption'. Least of all can the
periodic character of crises be explained in this way, since no periodic
phenomenon can be explained by constant conditions.
[pp. 241-242]”
― Finance Capital: A study in the latest phase of capitalist development
Is this you? Let us know. If not, help out and invite Rudolph to Goodreads.
