Neuroscience vindicates Marx? I think many of us suspected this all along...
February 15, 2017
I'm wondering if you are familiar with this study by a neuroscientist at Arizona State. His EEG research indicates that one's economic class impacts one's ability to empathize. Short version: well-off folks do not empathize as well as the rest of us. It struck me as interesting and I thought it might be worthwhile to mention it during one of your updates. I've included a link to the academic paper as well as a more accessible summary of the research in New York Magazine below. Best! https://asumaclab.files.wordpress.com/2014/08/social-class-affects-neural-empathic-responses.pdf http://nymag.com/scienceofus/2017/02/how-rich-people-see-the-world-differently.html
But what about the man with the gun? (Interview David Graeber?)
Listened to your recent discussion on Hegel's dialectic of the master and the slave, and agreed with much of your analysis. That said, how come most of us would rather be the master in that situation? You touched on it: the master has the man with the gun (a policeman or soldier) on his side. So two points: (1) How, really, can one fight that (ultimate) thread? (2) What might David Graeber's (author of Debt: The First 5000 Years) thoughts be in context of your work? Actually, really only one point: why not discuss these issues with David? (Also see his other book: The Democracy Project.) Just a suggestion, of course.
Richard Wolff posted an official response
No problem about discussing issues with Graeber. Just a matter of organizing and scheduling.
How do we keep one Worker Co-op from exploiting another Worker Co-op?
February 14, 2017
I keep thinking of a "Gig Economy" as a way to undermine Worker Co-operatives. You are now an independent worker-owner contractor not an employee.
Richard Wolff posted an official response
I suspect this is a matter of how one understands terms like "Independent worker-owner" or "Worker Coop." If the latter is just a gathering of the former (more than 1 of them) then there is little difference. The individual self-employed person who produces a good or service under contract to its purchaser is, in effect, both the producer of a surplus (more total value produced than is kept by the producer for his own consumption) and the appropriator of that surplus and thus the person who decides how that surplus will be distributed and used to reproduce this economic system/structure. A worker coop is simply a collection of individuals who organize work collectively among themselves (rather than individually) the produce an output that they divide into (1) the part they sell and use the revenue for their own consumption, and (2) the surplus part that, as a worker coop, they collectively appropriate from themselves and then decide how to use, distribute etc. Whats gone in both the individual and collective versions here is the basic opposition of employer and employee as different persons with correspondingly opposed interests. These two version need not exist or function as competitors, enemies, mutual "underminers." They could simply co-exist as options for each individual to consider and decide for himself/herself as to their own workplace choice.
Love This Page! Possible Improvement?
February 14, 2017
Hello Mr Wolff! I enjoy reading this page and view it a couple times a day. I find the questions to be very insightful and reply to a few of them now and then with my own thoughts and opinions. I am hoping it will start a conversation beyond, or in addition to, what Richard Wolff provides and I hope that is ok. I am wondering if it would be possible to show everyones replies on the main website instead of having to click through to other responses? I understand that this is a forum to hear Richards ideas and I enjoy that his replies show up in grey to distinguish them from other jibberish. However I am also aware that Richard is in high demand and cannot be expected to answer every inquiry in a timely manner due to his busy schedule. Given that I was hoping we members could share our own experiences and thoughts on the main page. It is a small thing but I sometimes wonder if anyone will ever view my comments buried in a question from last week if they have to dig for it. I am not even certain the author of the post gets notified when someone replies to their question so, perhaps, nobody ever sees our comments on each others posts. It may not be technically feasible and I accept that. It may also be beyond the scope of what you are trying to accomplish here, and I accept that as well. But if you are looking to create a place for conversation involving the larger community then this small change might go a long way towards helping us members connect to each other and learn from each other as well as Richard Wolff. From a technical perspective I am thinking of a simple notification on the main page that this thread has 3 replies with a nifty click here to drop down that content, similar to facebooks format Id say, but keeping you on the main page instead of navigating away. In any event I hope this went to the right place, Im not sure if you have technical people to contact directly, and understand if this is not implemented but had to share the idea. Thank you for your time.
Where will you be at in Missouri?
February 13, 2017
I don't see any events on the D@W Calendar for MO. You mentioned the event in your latest EU. Just wondering because hopefully I live nearby. Thank you.
The Most Signed White House Petition in History
February 13, 2017
I'd like you to consider a piece on this White House Petition. It has gather about twice the number of the previously most signed petition and has a chance of breaking the never before approached number of one million signatures within thirty days. This is my own article on the Daily Kos>>> http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2017/2/13/1633207/--The-Only-Ones-that-Care-about-My-Tax-Returns-are-the-Reporters-D-J-T-January-11-2017?_=2017-02-13T08:57:45.568-08:00 SIGN HERE>>> https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/immediately-release-donald-trumps-full-tax-returns-all-information-needed-verify-emoluments-clause-compliance
Capitalists & Risk??
February 13, 2017
Capitalists exploit labor. Does Marx address whether capitalists merit a larger share of profits because they submit resources to the rigors of market "risk"? As such, are capitalists and management shielding workers from risk to any appreciable extent?
Is China and USA conflict a high possibility considering the level of their interdependence?
February 13, 2017
If China and USA go to war i can only see the chinese losing lots of money(USA market) and same for USA's big companies(factories in china) ... Is there anyone who would gain anything out of it?
In Japan, some employers are now fining their workers for staying home if they are sick.
What's worse is that Japanese labor laws, as expressed in the Labor Standards Act support such a practice. An employer may fine a worker up to 50% of a day's wages (in addition to the day's lost wages due to not being at work) or up to 10% of a month's wages. It's all here in an article by Japan Today. Talk about treating your workforce like mere Golden Geese. https://www.japantoday.com/category/kuchikomi/view/worsening-labor-shortage-taking-toll-on-sick-workers
Does capitalism require economic growth, and if so why?
February 13, 2017
Neat article on co-ops for formerly incarcerated people
February 12, 2017
Neat article on co-ops for formerly incarcerated people http://www.shareable.net/blog/this-co-op-gives-formerly-incarcerated-people-jobs-and-community
Prices, coops, and planning in the USSR
February 12, 2017
Dear Prof. Wolff, How did the Soviets and other planned economies gauge prices and demands through their central planning? I found this NY Times article from 1988 that mentioned coops in the USSR. I thought Soviets hated coops on the grounds that they were ideologically bourgeois, so I looked into it a little more, and found this link to a law on coops in USSR. Would you be able to breakdown how coops fit into Soviet central planning? Thank you very much, Andrea
The possibility of American Isolation, and of the destruction of NAFTA.
February 12, 2017
Currently it seems as though President Trump's policies and agenda is pushing America into isolationism. Do you believe, that if America were to go isolationist, it would negatively impact the economy? On top of that, what do you take on the possibility of the destruction of NAFTA?
Are Peter Navarro's economic ideas "folderol"?
Article at politico.com: http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/02/peter-navarro-trump-trade-china-214772 "Folderol" appears in 4th paragraph. Thank you!
Richard Wolff posted an official response
I admit to not knowing exactly what "folderol" means. In any case, Navarro's kind of thinking is actually not so rare. It is the flip side of the neoclassical economics profession's glib confidence in "free trade" as some sublimely perfect framework in which everyone wins. Critics have long argued that free trade is like protected trade in that it yields winners and losers but they are different winners and losers. Once that premise is admitted, then the question becomes merely showing that one set of winners and losers is to be preferred to the other set. The US, in views like Navarro's and Bannon's too, is thus a net loser from free trade relative to its better "winner" position in the correctly protected trade or, if its plays better, in the better constructed bi-lateral "free" trade agreements. My problem with the debate between free and protected trade (however labeled) is that it is a debate above all about winners and losers among capitalist enterprises/industries. It has little to do with the much more important (in my view) struggle between capital and labor over the capitalist system per se. Both free trade and protected trade provide contexts and supports for capital's domination over labor, its exploitative basis for profits, its socially costly business cycles, etc. Capitalism's victims and critics should not get caught up taking sides in a battle among capitalists unless it ca be shown that doing so advances the quite different goals and objectives of a social movement critical of capitalism itself.