where did he go wrong
Where did he go wrong
Other urls found in this thread:
fred.stlouisfed.org
marxists.org
twitter.com
He was born.
Ignoring basic human nature and the laws of economics for starters.
Get woke go broke
which laws of economics did he ignore
He attempted to raise the masses beyond the narrow horizons imposed by the ruling classes. Naughty boy was Karl.
Bad goy...
>From the failed 1848 revolutions untill the 1860's Marx thought an industrial crisis would cause a revolution in France
The revolution and the crisis never occurred and Marx was subjected to ridicule by his peers.
>Marx thought the recession in 1857 would lead to a revolution
It never did.
>Engels thought a crisis would lead a revolution in England by 1886
A revolution never happened and the economy in Britian recovered by 1888.
>Marx thought Capitalism had the long run tendency to keep real wages at a subsistence level
In reality, real wages have gone up in the long run.
>Marx thought workers' plight would lead to Communism
In reality, modern day plight of workers has not led to a renewed interest in Communism.
>Marx thought Capitalism had the long-run tendency to decrease the rate of profit
In reality, the rate of profit has not decreased.
>>Marx thought Capitalism had the long run tendency to keep real wages at a subsistence level
>In reality, real wages have gone up in the long run.
in his mature writings, Marx didn't predict wages wouldn't go up, only that they would stabilize in relation to overall economic growth.
>>Marx thought Capitalism had the long-run tendency to decrease the rate of profit
>In reality, the rate of profit has not decreased.
according to what data?
>Marx didn't predict wages wouldn't go up
Marx thought that wages would only remain at subsistence level. In reality, disposable income and real wages have drastically increased.
>according to what data?
Literally anything that's not Kliman's faulty data.
He didn't predict they'd stabilize. He predicted they'd stagnate, which isn't correct
fred.stlouisfed.org
It's a very easy claim to disprove even when you look at real wages in the past century.
Driven by spite and made the mistake of overtly incorporating economics into an ideology that's primarily based on virtues that can't be measured
>laws of economics
This
And that folks is why Peru is still a 3rd world shithole.
:)
he's right though...
He didn't work, the same as his ideology.
>Peru’s a shithole cuz no muh free marketplace
Kill yourself, dumbo
>Marx thought that wages would only remain at subsistence level.
for unskilled workers, there's a tendency to, yeah. there are also countervailing tendencies. the point is that average wages remain stable in relation to overall growth.
marxists.org
>Literally anything that's not Kliman's faulty data.
in virtue of what is Kilman's data faulty?
marxists.org
Please tell me what 'laws of economics' did Marx ignore ill wait (:
you're right, if I look at a certain cherry picked industry then wages indeed didn't grow. Too bad aggregate real wages increased, LOL try again commie pleb.
Law of supply and demand.
marx was based. it's the contemporary dsa """anarchists""" who are the problem.
(((((((((((((((he)))))))))))))) killed millions and enslaved the rest to (((((((((bankers.)))))))). He and his minions are rotting in hell.
>where did he go wrong
He was born. We could question lazy mentally ill retards all day and get no more insight into their insanity.
>where did he go wrong
He shouldn't have left the Marx Bros.
Marx did predict a decent amount of stuff
And I have also noticed a large increase in socialist/communist thinking amongst the youth in the last 2-3 years.
banting and memes asides, i'll deliver the right answer
Thank God Bohm-Bawerk assraped Das Kapital so hard, Marx died without publishing the Second and Third volumes
>for unskilled workers, there's a tendency to
Nope. Explain why the real wages of unskilled labourers have skyrocketed in the last century? It almost seems like capitalism has the long-run tendency to decrease the rate of exploitation.
>the point is that average wages remain stable in relation to overall growth
Define growth.
>in virtue of what is Kilman's data faulty?
There are some studies that calculate profit after tax. As for Kliman he counts profit as the output that corporations do not pay their employees which even includes interest payments and transfer payments.
Hilferding dealt with Bohm-Bawerk's critique in 1905. if you want to reproduce an argument against the LTV, go ahead.
>Nope. Explain why the real wages of unskilled labourers have skyrocketed in the last century?
because the reproducibility of workers has become more expensive. (in addition to the countervailing tendencies.)
>Define growth.
productivity
>There are some studies that calculate profit after tax. As for Kliman he counts profit as the output that corporations do not pay their employees which even includes interest payments and transfer payments.
don't understand why you think this is faulty.