Ask Lemmygrad

829 readers

1 users here now

A place to ask questions of Lemmygrad's best and brightest

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

Can someone please explain this to me? (lemmygrad.ml)

submitted 1 week ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

28 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Someone was saying that even if using machines becomes cheaper than using humans, capitalist will still use humans because

"automation constitutes constant capital and human labour is variable capital

The Tendency for the Rate of Profit to Fall disproves that fact"

What do those mean?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago

I assume from your phrasing you mean to say that "some industrialists will prefer human labour over cheaper machines". (But you could instead have meant to say that "in society, there will always be a role for human labour").

I think this proposition is false (in the long run) due to the the profit-maximization logic of capitalism. Even if some industrialists prefer human labour, in the long run they'd eventually be out-competed by those that didn't. But yes, machines cost a lot upfront which could delay the switchover (possibly even beyond the sunset of the industry!).

I think the "Rate of profit falls" theory doesn't matter. Assume it's true: machines lower the rate of profit. But, capitalists can't (as a group) decide not to use machines. Without control of private assets (e.g. capital) the capitalists cease to be, and become a purely rentier class again. It would no longer be capitalism but feudalism. I don't believe capitalists have the power (or desire) to cause such a transition.