view the rest of the comments
the_dunk_tank
It's the dunk tank.
This is where you come to post big-brained hot takes by chuds, libs, or even fellow leftists, and tear them to itty-bitty pieces with precision dunkstrikes.
Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.
Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.
Rule 3: No sectarianism.
Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome
Rule 5: No ableism of any kind (that includes stuff like libt*rd)
Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.
Rule 7: Do not individually target other instances' admins or moderators.
Rule 8: The subject of a post cannot be low hanging fruit, that is comments/posts made by a private person that have low amount of upvotes/likes/views. Comments/Posts made on other instances that are accessible from hexbear are an exception to this. Posts that do not meet this requirement can be posted to [email protected]
Rule 9: if you post ironic rage bait im going to make a personal visit to your house to make sure you never make this mistake again
You're supposed to produce nothing and make money from that, like the US does!
Some might read your post as an exaggeration, but a good amount of mainstream economists think exactly like this and treat the idea that productivity is important as a revelation.
You would think that any economist who actually wanted to be successful would try to understand the shortfalls of capitalism too by reading Capital.
Instead, "wait, if people don't make enough money to buy treats, then the won't buy treats??", is an actual revelation somehow.
so much of this stuff happens over multiple decades. That is enough time to establish your career and be in the second half or nearing retirement. So being right isnt what’s going to pay the bills. Going along with the orthodoxy will. If the incentives were different maybe we’d see orthodoxy be more in line with reality.
High Priests of Capitalism
i dont get it, why is there so much whining then by failure to "increase productivity"? firms dont invest in tools & training and they still want productivity line to go up right? or am i missing something?
Gotta look at the definition of "productivity" people are using. Often it's just productivity = revenue / number of employees.
Defined that way, you can fire 20% of employees and make the remaining employees do more work for the same pay. That causes a 20% increase in productivity because suddenly each employee is doing more work.
Doesn't actually mean they want to make more things.
And of course, there's nothing "unproductive" about having a whole slew of unemployed people who have been pushed out of the workforce as a reserve army of labor.
They're producing too much so we can't profit from an artificial scarcity noooooOOoOOoo