The utility value of a commodity is based on how useful a commodity is and the exchange value of a commodity refers to how much we can get in exchange for a commodity if we were to sell it. Smith says that the exchange value of a commodity is measured in terms of several different types of prices. The nominal price of a commodity is the measure of exchange value in terms of money and the real price is in terms of the amount of labor it took to produce it. Thus, according to Smith, “The real price of everything, what everything really costs to the man who wants to acquire it, is the toil and trouble of acquiring it” and what
Writings of Karl Marx had formed the theoretical basis for communism and the continual debate against capitalism. Marx understood capitalism to be a system in which the means of production are privately owned and profit is generated by the sale of the proletariat’s labour. He considered it to be an unfair exploitation of hard work with alienated social interactions and purpose. I agree with Marx that capitalism is indeed unfair and alienating, because it concentrates wealth within a small group of people by exploiting the surplus value of workers’ labour, and creates an alienated workforce. Hence, this essay will first discuss the relevance of Marx’s perception of capitalism as an alienating and unfair system for the contemporary world, before examining the potential of governments to influence the extent of alienation and unfairness that occurs.
In advanced economies there are various ways to deal with the question of scarcity. Different countries use different approaches or types of economic system. Arguments about the merits of markets and planning proceed at different levels. For example, opponents of the market system are often found really to be attacking ‘capitalism’. Private ownership of the means of production leads, they claim, to an inequitable distribution of income and wealth and to the exploitation of labor by the capitalist class.
It is argued that social inequality occurs because of the conflict between the upper-class and the working-class, or as Marx defines it, the Bourgeoisie and the Proletariat. Based on the Manifesto of the Communist Party (Marx and Engels, 1848), the divergence emerges because the aim of the Bourgeoisie is to obtain a surplus-value that is produced by the work of the Proletariat. On the other side, the Bourgeoisie provides the Proletariat with the minimum required, such as a place to live and a minimum wage, in order to keep the society under control and avoid a rebellion. However, Marx did predict a revolt of the working-class that would eventually lead to a communist regime. When it comes to applying this theoretical approach to reality, it is evident to notice that no global revolt in regards to capitalism has occurred.
I began with a Hegelian notion of alienation, but have since developed a more materialist conception. I have come to the conclusion that capitalism is what mediates social relationships of production through commodities, including labour, that are bought and sold on the market. Connection between persons such as workers or between workers and capitalists is corrupted. The possibility that one may give up ownership of one 's own labour, one 's capacity to transform the world, is tantamount to being alienated from one 's own nature. This loss is a prime example of false consciousness, the scenario where the ideology of the ruling class is embodied willfully by a subordinate class.
Sinclair emphasizes that capitalism is detrimental to the working class, and he proposes that socialism is the solution to economic inequality and the lack of power among the working class. For example, he described “the tricks of the packers, their masters, the tyrants who ruled them… the irregular hours and the cruel speeding-up, the lowering of wages, the raising of prices! The whole machinery of society was at their oppressors’ command” (177). Sinclair depicted the factory owners in the novel as disgraceful rulers to reflect how capitalism allowed ruling class leaders to oppress workers. He also portrays the corrupt effects of capitalism on workers’ well-being, illustrating that “each day the struggle becomes fiercer, the pace more cruel; each day you have to toil a little harder and feel the iron hand of circumstance close upon you a little tighter” (298).
In other words, it is the amount of money that the banks can lend out to investors. Monetarists differ from keynesians in the ideology that monetary policy in more effective to control and manage the economy as a whole with wages, price levels, employment, money supply, inflation, etc. They believe that the government subsidized bank, known as the FED can control the economy and that fiscal policy only affects specific companies, and a small percentage of the population. Monetarist theory asserts that variations in the money supply have major influences on national output in the short run and on price levels over longer periods. A typical monetarists would be opposed to the government role of controlling taxes and wages and instead believe that the central bank can adversely control all of the necessary regulations the economy
These theorists believed that crime was the result of this decline and could be reduced by recovering social solidarity (Lilly, Cullen, & Ball, 2015). Under this perspective, the erosion of social solidarity was viewed in economic terms, in that the new division of labor unjustifiably exploited one class over the other (Lilly, 2015). Marx and Engels claimed that conflict was inherent due to the nature of social arrangements under capitalism (Lilly, 2015). Unfortunately, capitalism provided more power to those already in power and created conflict due to unfair disparities (Lilly, 2015). Thus, Marx and Engels provided that destroying capitalism and implementing communism would increase social solidarity and reduce crime (Lilly,
Chartalism vs. Menger Comparison Money in Economics is typically defined as a primary medium of exchange or a mean of exchange; it allows a person to trade something of his own for something he wants. “The ideal money typically has three characteristics: it acts as a medium of exchange, it is an economic good, and it is a means of economic calculation.”(1) Money is anything of value that serves as an accepted medium of financial exchange. It is considered a legal tender for the repayment of debt, has a standard of value, unit of accounting measure, and is a means to save or store purchasing power. Therefore, any form of money is more dynamic and valuable when it is portable, Uniform, Divisible, and Durable. I will be discussing two different
that it took to produce it. In the article, “Capital” Marx emphasis on “commodities”, explores the sources of “value” by asking what determines the worth or price of goods bought and sold on the industry. Marx draws a distinction between “use-value” and “exchange-value when he states, “In the circulation C—M—C, the money is in the end converted into a commodity, that serves as a use-value; it is spent once for all. In the inverted form, M—C—M, on the contrary, the buyer lays out money in order that, as a seller, he may recover money