raghu wrote:
> > > > The way I see it, there is a brewing conflict between the industrial
> > > > capitalists and finance capitalists.
Sandwichman wrote:
> > > I would assume capitalists have diversified portfolios.
me:
> > I agree. IMHO, I think there is no conflict between industrial
> > capitalists and financial capitalists, even to the degree that there
> > is a conflict between big businesses and small businesses.
raghu, now:
> Is there any empirical studies of the amount of diversification of
> wealthy individuals? I have no problem believing billionaires are
> fully diversified: a $1B wealth is truly forever. But what about
> relatively smaller wealths?
it's really easy to diversify, by putting money into a mutual fund.
> > Rather, there is a (structural) conflict between the short-term
> > individual interests of capitalists of all stripes ("deregulation,
> > subsidies for me, etc.") and the long-term collective interests of the
> > capitalist class as whole (more stability, preserve the system).
> > Financial capitalists are simply one version of the particularistic
> > perspective.
> I think this misses an important distinction. Finance capitalists are
> a very special kind of capitalist. I think of financiers as skipping
> the 'C' in the classic M-C-M' formula and operating as M-M' directly.
> As such their activities (because of the absence of the 'C') are
> harder to justify on ideological grounds; their profits come too
> obviously from other people's sweats.
To me, Marx's perspective is more useful. It's not that "finance
capitalists" are a special type; rather, it's _finance capital_
that's special.[*] That is, it's not the finance-oriented individuals
that are relevant here but the social _positions_ within the social
structure and process of capitalism. People move between positions but
the positions remain. There is a segment of the system that focuses on
M-M', yes, but that does not correspond to a specific group of people.
The exception is at the lower levels: it's the employees of financial
corporations who are stuck in the (usually lucrative) niche. The
_owners_, on the other hand, spread their money around a lot. They can
do so because they have a lot of money.
[*] To keep this conversation on track, I'm not using the
Hilferding-Lenin terminology here. "Finance capital" does not refer to
a merger of finance and industrial capital. It just refers to M-M'.
--
Jim Devine / "Segui il tuo corso, e lascia dir le genti." (Go your own
way and let people talk.) -- Karl, paraphrasing Dante.
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
