Has there been any good quantitative analysis of the Chinese "rate of exploitation" which (I believe -- proving my lack of deep study of economic theory) is PRIOR to and more BASIC than the rate of profit?? It is my understanding (again based on not enough real deep study but ...) that the rate of exploitation based on increased intensity of production has limits but that so far there has been NO LIMIT based on "technological progress" which (despite what I thought years ago) is not based on increased (constant) capital intensity but can actually be based on increased KNOWLEDGE ----
If knowledge-based "progress" has no boundaries, than the rate of exploitation has no boundaries --- BUT --- the labor power value of subsistence may have a lower bound because --- (simplistically) --- we all have to EAT and eating involves creation of something physical --- [and certain other necessities of life also involve physical stuff --- the materials that create shelter and clothing --- the materials that tap into energy (even solar energy requires physical solar collectors) ---] So it may be that the physical "rate of exploitation" of the ecology of the planet may create a lower bound for the rate of exploitation of human beings. If the Chinese seem to have solved the limits of capitalism, will they run up against the physical limits of the planet? (Or will they develop and DEPLOY the sustainable technologies that science knows exists but which neoliberal capitalism seems incapable of deploying?) --- or will the Chinese workers unite to overthrow Chinese capitalism because Chinese capitalism will be unable to buy them off as was the case for first British capitalism (Marx said a "bourgeois working class") and in the 20th century with American "affluent" capitalism???? Most of us adults won't be around to see it --- but our kids and grandkids will .... (Sorry to keep mentioning this but the ORESKES-CONWAY book THE COLLAPSE OF WESTERN CIVILIZATION which is a dystopian novel ends with a SECOND People's Republic of China picking up the pieces after millions of people die in the global warming nightmare over the next century ...) On Mon, Jun 17, 2024 at 4:22 PM Marv Gandall via groups.io <marvgand2= [email protected]> wrote: > If China is capitalist, as many across the political spectrum insist, then > it is surely a newer and more advanced form of the system and contradicts > the Marxist claim dating back to the mid-19th century that capitalism has > exhausted its historic potential. Far from having become a “fetter” on the > development of new productive forces, a report in today's Asia Times > asserts that the extent and speed at which China’s economy has surpassed > that of the US and of the other advanced capitalist countries is greatly > understated. > > Though still lagging in per capita productivity, the latest World Bank > statistics estimate that China’s gross domestic product measured in > purchasing power parity is 125% the size of US economic output. But Han > Feizi says "who are we kidding? Last year, China generated twice as much > electricity as the US, produced 12.6 times as much steel and 22 times as > much cement. China’s shipyards accounted for over 50% of the world’s output > while US production was negligible. In 2023, China produced 30.2 million > vehicles, almost three times more than the 10.6 million made in the US. On > the demand side, 26 million vehicles were sold in China last year, 68% more > than the 15.5 million sold in the US. Chinese consumers bought 434 million > smartphones, three times the 144 million sold in the US. As a country, > China consumes twice as much meat and eight times as much seafood as the > US. Chinese shoppers spent twice as much on luxury goods as American > shoppers." > > Feizi attributes the disconnect to Chinese economists' understating the > growth in services which they consider as "necessary costs of material > production rather than real value creation” while GDP in the US and other > Western economies is "largely driven by the inflation of necessary > services – rent, healthcare, education and childcare – not by manufactured > goods”. > > "As necessary services become an ever larger share of Western economies, > their growth does not appear to result in discernible improvements in > living standards...China’s material-focused GDP may be a better measure > of the economy as it relates to living standards”, Feizi notes. > > Full: > https://asiatimes.com/2024/06/whats-the-real-size-of-chinas-economy/?mc_cid=64db20d951 > > This week’s Economist cover story meanwhile reports on the parallel rise > of Chinese science. "The old science world order, dominated by America, > Europe and Japan, is coming to an end”, it says, pointing to China’s > state-directing planning and investment in research and development which > has allowed it to vault past the US and Europeans in the physical > sciences, chemistry and Earth and environmental sciences while “playing > catch up” in other fields. > > According to the Economist, Chinese scientists now author more “high > impact” papers - those cited most often by their peers - and China employs > more researchers than the US and Europe combined. More scientists are now > returning to the country than leaving. Six Chinese universities now rank > in the top ten according to one prestigious index."They may not be > household names in the West yet, but get used to hearing about Shanghai > Jiao Tong, Zhejiang and Peking (Beida) Universities in the same breath as > Cambridge, Harvard and ETH Zurich...As Chinese universities fill with > state-of-the-art equipment and elite researchers, and salaries become > increasingly competitive, Western institutions look less appealing to young > and ambitious Chinese scientists”. > > The state’s current five year plan calls for advanced research in quantum > technologies, AI, semiconductors, neuroscience, biotechnology, and other > cutting edge sciences, and while China "still produces a vast amount of > lower-quality science too”, the areas where America and Europe still lead > are "unlikely to be safe for long...There is little to suggest that the > Chinese scientific behemoth will not continue growing stronger." > > Full: https://archive.is/Dp7J4#selection-1509.0-1509.99 > > > > > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#30798): https://groups.io/g/marxmail/message/30798 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/106728659/21656 -=-=- POSTING RULES & NOTES #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. #4 Do not exceed five posts a day. -=-=- Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://groups.io/g/marxmail/leave/8674936/21656/1316126222/xyzzy [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
