Comments on: The Flaws of Marxism http://damienmanier.com/2009-11-26/the-flaws-of-marxism/ My Personal Philosopy Sat, 18 Feb 2012 08:27:16 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v= By: Hope http://damienmanier.com/2009-11-26/the-flaws-of-marxism/comment-page-1/#comment-5415 Hope Sat, 03 Dec 2011 03:54:12 +0000 http://damienmanier.com/?p=14#comment-5415 This helped me out a lot with a paper! Thank you! This helped me out a lot with a paper! Thank you!

]]> By: Roberta http://damienmanier.com/2009-11-26/the-flaws-of-marxism/comment-page-1/#comment-4025 Roberta Sun, 03 Jul 2011 22:36:19 +0000 http://damienmanier.com/?p=14#comment-4025 None can doubt the veciraty of this article. None can doubt the veciraty of this article.

]]> By: Damien http://damienmanier.com/2009-11-26/the-flaws-of-marxism/comment-page-1/#comment-3561 Damien Mon, 11 Apr 2011 00:21:34 +0000 http://damienmanier.com/?p=14#comment-3561 Scott, Both "faults" that you present are the results of government intervention, through the use of coercion, and do not reflect the free market. The housing bubble was caused by credit expansion, but this is the result of fractional reserve banking which allows non-existent or fabricated money to be lent out. For example, you deposit $100 into the bank. The bank keeps $20 of that in reserves and loans $80 to someone else. Your economic calculations are based off a savings of $100 and the person who received the loan's economic calculations are based off of $80 cash holdings, so the aggregate economic calculation for this simple scenario is based off $180, when in reality there was only $100. This distorts the market and leads entrepreneurs to malinvest. The malinvestment, in recent times, was in the construction of new houses which caused a surplus of supply and a drop in prices, which is perfectly in line with the theory of supply and demand driving prices. On your second note, even you recognize that it is government that distorts the demand for weapons and not the market. You can include an entity that claims a monopoly on coercion as a participant in the free market. Every action it makes creates a "zero-sum" contest and arbitrarily chooses "winners" and "losers" that do not reflect what would have occurred under a system of free exchange. Thanks for your response and interest. Damien Manier Scott,

Both “faults” that you present are the results of government intervention, through the use of coercion, and do not reflect the free market. The housing bubble was caused by credit expansion, but this is the result of fractional reserve banking which allows non-existent or fabricated money to be lent out. For example, you deposit $100 into the bank. The bank keeps $20 of that in reserves and loans $80 to someone else. Your economic calculations are based off a savings of $100 and the person who received the loan’s economic calculations are based off of $80 cash holdings, so the aggregate economic calculation for this simple scenario is based off $180, when in reality there was only $100. This distorts the market and leads entrepreneurs to malinvest. The malinvestment, in recent times, was in the construction of new houses which caused a surplus of supply and a drop in prices, which is perfectly in line with the theory of supply and demand driving prices.

On your second note, even you recognize that it is government that distorts the demand for weapons and not the market. You can include an entity that claims a monopoly on coercion as a participant in the free market. Every action it makes creates a “zero-sum” contest and arbitrarily chooses “winners” and “losers” that do not reflect what would have occurred under a system of free exchange.

Thanks for your response and interest.

Damien Manier

]]> By: Scott T. http://damienmanier.com/2009-11-26/the-flaws-of-marxism/comment-page-1/#comment-3559 Scott T. Sun, 10 Apr 2011 17:37:07 +0000 http://damienmanier.com/?p=14#comment-3559 I have to disagree with you on the concept of supply and demand being the sole determining factor in the value of a commodity. This is most evident in recent times in the collapse of the once booming U.S. housing market i.e. many houses built over a decade ago that have since never been lived in. Capitalists have and continue to force production without demand as a means to advance the market economy that, by its nature, must constantly expand into infinity; this is done so most recently through dependence on credit as a temporary means of expansion. Also, the implication that demand is determined by the consumer is also a flawed assertion. Take the military industry, in which a handful of people determine this "demand" of weapons and war-goods independent of the demand of the people providing the capital for this military (the taxpayer). I have to disagree with you on the concept of supply and demand being the sole determining factor in the value of a commodity. This is most evident in recent times in the collapse of the once booming U.S. housing market i.e. many houses built over a decade ago that have since never been lived in. Capitalists have and continue to force production without demand as a means to advance the market economy that, by its nature, must constantly expand into infinity; this is done so most recently through dependence on credit as a temporary means of expansion.
Also, the implication that demand is determined by the consumer is also a flawed assertion. Take the military industry, in which a handful of people determine this “demand” of weapons and war-goods independent of the demand of the people providing the capital for this military (the taxpayer).

]]> By: Anonymous http://damienmanier.com/2009-11-26/the-flaws-of-marxism/comment-page-1/#comment-1001 Anonymous Tue, 19 Oct 2010 13:39:54 +0000 http://damienmanier.com/?p=14#comment-1001 that was very intellectually refreshing! thanks for such interesting insights. that was very intellectually refreshing! thanks for such interesting insights.

]]>