Where were you when the CEO of McDonalds did more to destabilize Capitalism than every single CommunistParty in the Developed World combined?

Attached: (960x626, 94.4K)

Other urls found in this thread:

Wendy's was already experimenting with this two years ago and Amazon is trying to do the same at physical retail stores.

Its the plan of the Bogs

Attached: 500full-igor-bogdanoff.jpg (500x500, 28.94K)

It is time for Luddites

Attached: Luddites-PD-20170202105142284.jpg (648x432, 150.88K)

No, let it happen

Based Bog

Attached: FallingRateOfPRofit.png (935x594, 145.97K)

Does it mean burgeoisie no longer needs us?

Attached: Screenshot_20190102-140220.png (1440x720, 309.17K)

That's pretty cool but if they think the type of people who consistently eat fast food are going to pay delivery fees for it then they're out of their goddamn minds.

Just put a hand sanitizer bottle next to it and it's all good.

Value is created by human labor alone. This shit does nothing but drive down the rate of profit.

Attached: extra-sausage.jpg (1755x2450, 294.7K)

Labor is not the source of all wealth. Nature is just as much the source of use values (and it is surely of such that material wealth consists!) as labor, which itself is only the manifestation of a force of nature, human labor power. the above phrase is to be found in all children's primers and is correct insofar as it is implied that labor is performed with the appurtenant subjects and instruments. But a socialist program cannot allow such bourgeois phrases to pass over in silence the conditions that lone give them meaning. And insofar as man from the beginning behaves toward nature, the primary source of all instruments and subjects of labor, as an owner, treats her as belonging to him, his labor becomes the source of use values, therefore also of wealth. The bourgeois have very good grounds for falsely ascribing supernatural creative power to labor; since precisely from the fact that labor depends on nature it follows that the man who possesses no other property than his labor power must, in all conditions of society and culture, be the slave of other men who have made themselves the owners of the material conditions of labor. He can only work with their permission, hence live only with their permission.

I think meant exchange values. You know, as in the labour theory of value.

You are being far to optimistic here. Capitalism has shown the ability to easily re-allocate mass labour power into new industries, just like the invention of the car didn't end capitalism because it made carriage drivers and stable boys homeless, the automation of McDonalds won't either.

I actually really fucking hate this automation Nick Land tier bullshit in the modern left, there is nothing in Marxism that suggests that capitalism will abolish itself like that.

Wealth is not exchange value, your big "gotcha" moment is an embarrassing failure. With wealth Marx means properties that may include stuff that stands outside the social relations of capitalism, like a vein of gold or breathable air. The latter has no exchange value at all for instance.

Attached: FallingRateOfPRofit.png (935x594, 145.97K)

This trend is highly disputed and Marx himself recognized many counteracting tendencies. The ML-poster is right, all this crisis theory bullshit is second international revisionism.

Value is not
- use value,
- wealth,
- or even exchange value.
Try actually reading Marx.

Over a hundred and fifty years of economic data has shown that over the long term the rate of profit is falling, and it is a result of technological innovation, as automation allows a firm to extract super profits by having their workers produce commodities under the Socially Nessicary Labor Time. However to remain competitive other firms must implement the new automation, which standardizes the SNLT required for the production of a commodity to be lower, thus reducing the commodity's value. Eventually commodities will be produced that have no value.

Capital can offset that with inventing a bunch of labour intensive commodities.

I read all three volumes of Capital in the original German. Tell me where I'm wrong, you smug bastard.

Who are you explaining this to? I am very much familiar with the theory behind the TRPF, but as I said, Marx himself recognized a whole roster of counteracting tendencies and there exists no conclusive empiricial evidence over the last 150 years as you claim.
In any case, a "revolutionary theory" which relies on capitalism collapsing on its own does not deserve the name as, again, the case of the second international has shown.


All this automation won't matter if there's no one left to buy their goods.

He literally says right there that calling value exchange value "does no harm" since "value assumes an independent form […] only when placed in a value or exchange relation with another commodity of a different kind."

Producing commodities with no use vale dosen’t work though. Just because a mudpie has labor inputs required dons’t give it value.

Needs are created.

And oftentimes this fails

You've made a strong claim here but you haven't done anything to substantiate it. Here is a figure from Esteban Maito's 2014 study one the rate of profit for 14 core capitalist countries. Please explain what's wrong with it.

Attached: rate of profit, 14 core countries estaban maito 2014.png (715x387, 40.14K)

Your point?

Value is exchange value in that the social relationship between commodities is fully set by the objective reality that is abstract human labor.

Attached: GIJoe.png (500x803, 202.14K)

Or rather everyone left does not possess the means to purchase those goods.

Of course there are counteracting tendencies. Never the less the trend remains, because that which motivates it remains. Systemic growth is only possible so long as there is something new to consume.

While you two are at it, check out this abomination over 6X the recommended length of a Wikipedia article, with only a single wimpy graph halfway down:

Attached: Autistic Screeching Channel.png (486x419, 259.08K)

Attached: READ NIGGA READ.mp4 (480x360, 271.72K)

That's what I mean. Even if they automate 90% of the jobs out there they still need a consumer class for the economy to function.

Not that I expect porky to think long term like that, since most of the shit they do only works in the short term.

Porky has to make shareholders happy with quarterly reports. It's not just some CEO plotting evil shit in the dark fortress. They have to keep the board on board and the stock price looking good so the real porkies can get their dividendies.

Yeah, Porky is not really planning this shit out. He is as much a slave to capital as we are. He just gets the golden pen with all the sows in it and cocaine in the troughs.

Point taken, but I can hardly see people feeling the same way about McDonalds or Burger King. Pizza isn't really "fast food" in that sense.

He's saying that about commodity being use-value and exchange value, not exchange value being value. Did you fail out of primary school?

Needs can’t be arbitrary created, their must be some preexisting want or desire. For most industry it’s a higher standard of living.

The entire basis of fiat currency is a manufactured need.

Attached: gzql4cqeng301.jpg (645x729, 39.97K)

Got anything more than memes as a counter-argument?