Quote:
Originally Posted by Samoht
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
Or, as in the case of the current US economic problems, those seeking profit have all of the currency available in their possession and those seeking goods have no currency remaining. From here, the currency shifts and the process of fleecing consumers starts over again.
|
Not possible. Firms do not keep and hold money. People may hold money, and they may hold a lot compared to other people; but if we're talking about all capital being diverted to the firms so that the consumers have no funds to purchase goods and services, that can't happen. The amount being "held" by the "1%" is for the most part, invested in firms, and the amount that isn't is inconsequential in the grand scheme of things. This financial crisis might mean a lot of things, and may surprise a lot of us looking back on it when we realize how there were certain things we just didn't understand - but the idea that massive wealth accumulation could essentially starve the consumption side of the economy thus crippling the production side is not among those things.
Edit: I typed all that out without getting to my final point, which was that many people who cite Marx and make similar arguments to this are acting upon the notion that wealth is finite. There is a set amount of wealth, and it is simply distributed. The simple fact is wealth is created. Things that are worthless by themselves can be combined to be worth something. The fact that you can take materials that are worth a small value, rearrange them, and magically they have increased in value proves that wealth is an infinite concept - there is no limit to wealth, and thus the idea of it being distributed in set amounts is simply wrong.