>>The ideas that nothing has changed since Lenin is just intellectual  laziness
and a refusal to admit that things change at best and dogmatism at  worse.

GMAC not GM is the master of GM. GMAC is GM.
Dude, its all finance capital.<<

I'm not sure I'm following your arguments. One, who here has said that
nothing has changed since Lenin? Two, who here has said we should
ignore 'finance capitalism' and speculation? Three, the categories you
are talking about are analytic ones, not ontological ones. I'm not
even sure they get to the psychological motive of most capitalists.
They simply describe the way capital functions in the transformative
social process. Often investors have only one motive (they have been
all but guaranteed a 12-20% annual return on their investment, even
more if the window given is 3-5 years). Their money goes towards
industrial and financial ends. In times of a bubble, since everyone
wants that 12-20% return they put their money into whatever they think
will get them that higher return. If manufacturing cars in Detroit
would get that--or at least convince them it could get that--they
would put their money there. Consider the Madoff scandal. Two years
ago he was one of the go-to guys who could get investors that high
rate of return. Now he is an alleged Ponzi scheme broker. What is the
difference between now and two years ago? No one believes in his
scheme anymore. I'm not sure if such speculative craziness goes all
the way back to the Tulip Bubble, but it has been in world capitalism
for quite some time. It's main attraction? The higher rate of return
promised. Why do people become convinced? Because they saw so-and-so
and so-and-so-and-so get 20% last year. Whether it is individual
investors or CALPERS or Harvard, the thinking is the same and is
exploited the same.

So could you re-state what you are trying to argue here? I just don't get it.


Marxism-Thaxis mailing list
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:

Reply via email to