Бесплатный фрагмент - A Method Preservation the Power of Large Capital for the Next Five Hundred Years

PREFACE TO ENGLISH EDITION

I sincerely apologize to the English reader for my incorrect English expressions, if such are found in the book. I hope that representatives of large capital will have the means to translate the book from Russian into English in the right expressions. In the Russian edition, the book was published under the title «Beyond the boundaries of capitalist relations. Chapter twenty-two».

I began to study capitalist relations back in 1979. It was necessary to carefully study the work of K. Marx and the history of political economy from the middle of the 17th century. It took to read the work of modern scientists studying economic phenomena. Even those scientists who did not associate economics with philosophy, history and politics. Political economy is good because the process can be described most accurately when we do not tear philosophy, history and politics away from economics. The net economy has always slipped to an attempt to mathematically describe an equation with millions of unknowns. The results of any theory and any forecasts based on a clean economy have always diverged from reality. The vulgar political economy of the 19th century was reborn into a vulgar economy, which, without taking into account real social production relations, is unable to understand capitalism. The development of capitalism has not stopped for a moment for 1200 years, since we find mention of the third estate in church chronicles. During this time, there were tectonic changes in the development of capitalism.

Certain changes have always led to new production relationships. Slavery was replaced by feudalism, feudalism by capitalism. There is no reason that changes in capitalism will not turn it into something else. The question is when and for what reason? The reason is very simple — this is the development of productive forces.

To the question «when» there is also an answer. Then, when we will work only two days a week, i.e. produce enough material things so that the other five days do not work. Perhaps this will happen with three days of work a week, or maybe two days will not be enough to leave the «kingdom of necessity and enter the kingdom of freedom». «A nation is only truly rich when 12 hours work instead of 6 hours. Wealth (real wealth) is not the disposal of surplus working time, but such time that can be freely located outside the time spent on direct production — free time for each individual and the whole society».

Today, one person engaged in material production «feeds» five other people of society. It is not a fact that all people in material production work with their own hands. More than half of people in material production are engaged in managerial work. An example from ammonia production is evidence. Previously, it took a thousand workers to produce 7,000 tons of ammonia. Now the production of 600 thousand tons of ammonia is provided by one worker, two locksmiths on duty and nine operators. K.Marx has long warned us about this. Capital turns science into a productive force, and the natural process into a production process. Capital puts a person next to the production process as an observer. Thus, now making it absurd to measure the surplus labor of a working person with his working time.

The growth of labor productivity systematically and persistently pushes capitalism to something other than capitalist relations. At the same time, the scientific community still reproduces anti — scientific views about the limited Earth resources, respectively, about the superfluous population and others. Capitalism needs a mass consumer. Without the mass consumer, there is no capitalism. At the same time, labor productivity with each new step destroys a potential consumer, throwing him not only from the production sector, but also from the service sector. In desperation, the capitalist invents an anti — capitalist theory of unconditional income. This theory is worse than a socialist idea. Imagine a completely plausible situation when all capitalists, i.e. people who own robotic means of production do not need workers. Let’s say that we have 2600 such lucky capitalists — by the number of existing billionaires (2022). As a combined capitalist, they produce all material things for life from the means of production to the objects of consumption. Each of them starts its production process with one command on a computer if an order comes from the other capitalist. Since all processes determine each other, we can provide a combined computer team for the combined capitalist to start all production processes, and represent all production processes as one process. Therefore, the entire production process ends when the robot delivery man transfers the manufactured item to the consumer.

To further illustrate the further development of capital in current trends, we will reduce the diversity of consumption to one total consumption. For example, to the consumption of toothbrush, and all 8 billion consumers (2022) to people living on unconditional income or to the aggregate consumer. Our combined capitalist must produce two toothbrushes. Produce one for yourself and one for the total consumer. Again, only the capitalist has money. There is just enough money to produce two toothbrushes. Therefore, he gives half of his money to the aggregate consumer so that he acquires one toothbrush. Because the combined capitalist does not need two toothbrushes. For the second half of the money, the capitalist may or may not buy a toothbrush. Because it already belongs to him, as the owner of the means of production and all consumer goods produced on them.

It turns out that the capitalist exchanges his gigantic surplus labor, even present in the process of material production in the form of mental labor and physical efforts, which he carried out by pressing the «enter» key, for idleness of everyone else. Undoubtedly, he can produce three toothbrushes. Keep two for yourself, and give only one to the combined consumer. In this situation, nothing has changed. He is forced to just give part of his work. Then a cannibalistic idea arises in his head — to leave only a cumulative capitalist on Earth, i.e. 2600 people. This idea is even more illogical than unconditional income. Where to put the 8 billion toothbrushes that a capitalist can produce? Who will need 100 million cars? Who will consume 2.8 billion tons of grain crops? The examples given point to the absurdity of such a capitalist outcome. Capitalism, designed to produce, produce and produce endlessly, boils down to miserable, miserable production for 2,600 consumers.

Another prospect opens up to capitalists by using made a small scientific discovery in capital turnover. Then you can extend your power in a capitalist form for at least another five hundred years of development. At the same time, a capitalist will need to increase the well — being of an individual and society as a whole in order to profit. Realizing this opens the development universe to capital, turning private initiative into a consistent element of the crisis — free human development.

Not a very big book is so expensive because it is solely for those 2,600 billionaires who, through their power, run the world. Perhaps millionaires will be more interested in this, but who will also want to profit an order of magnitude more from the growth of wealth than they do, making a profit from surplus labor. The method described in the discovery ensures the dynamic development of any people, any country, regardless of the world economic conditions. Therefore, I am sure that every capitalist will want to know the secret before others.

FOREWORD

The modern circulation of capital generates specific economic conditions. These conditions allow for the utilization of state strategic planning and management to bring tremendous benefits to individuals and society. Meanwhile, private businesses secure guaranteed profits. The state can leverage the conditions of modern capital circulation to enhance the effectiveness of its investment policies and reduce budget expenditures.

Modern capital turnover constantly throws goods into the sphere of personal and public consumption that cannot be sold immediately. People’s income or budget is not enough to buy necessary but expensive goods. These are houses, personal and public transport, means of education, health care, etc. Banks that have lent to the production of expensive goods are forced to use a loan refinancing mechanism. The fact is that the money of the first loan remained in the field of industrial consumption. They cannot be removed from there. The central bank is interested in maintaining the stability of the monetary system and the return of the first loan money. Therefore, he refinances the first loan of commercial bank, i.e. issues a second loan to repay the first. Therefore, the money of the second loan arises in the field of personal and public consumption for a moment. In this process, the borrower changes, and capital can again resume its turnover. The second loan is equal to the price of the goods, which includes the amount of the first loan and the surplus value. Then, in order to accelerate and repeatedly expand the turnover, it becomes possible to reduce the price of goods by the amount of direct costs — by the amount of the first loan. At the same time, additional money does not appear in the field of personal and public consumption, but consumption is increasing. There is no inflation. The production enterprise receives full income and profit, even with a decrease in the price of expensive goods when calculating and implementing the balance of supply and demand.

Previously, a commercial bank could not issue a loan to a wide range of end consumers due to their low income. In the accelerated capital turnover system, a commercial bank can issue a loan without risk to buy expensive goods. The central bank through accelerated capital turnover reduces the price of expensive goods. Thus, the commercial bank ensures the expansion of capital turnover with the dynamic growth of the well — being of people and society as a whole.

The system of accelerated capital turnover is based on the accurate calculation of material and professional resources. Such calculations are feasible in dynamic cross — industry balance solutions. The resources needed determine the amount of money needed. Money is always secondary to the availability of resources. The balance of money and resources ensures dynamic development without inflation. The reliability of calculations in the dynamic model of the cross — industry balance is achieved by the system of collecting inter — industry data, which are contained in the primary documents of the enterprise and which are loaded into the inter — industry balance in real time. Organizing the collection of such data is not difficult in modern information technologies. This way we get a digital twin of the entire economy with real — time analytics.

In turn, the system of accelerated capital turnover, having a balance of supply and demand for the entire time of capital turnover, makes it possible to reduce costs multiple times and push the boundaries of consumption (demand) in the existing conditions without inflationary and investment risks. This has enormous practical implications for the dynamic development of any society.

Therefore, I express my great gratitude to Professor, Doctor of Economics Elena Veduta for her discoveries and developments in cybernetics; Alexander Mikryukov for his critical view in solving many problems that arose during the study; Seissenbek Rysbekov for the active promotion of theory in the scientific and managerial community.

August 2022

O. Riapolov

INTRODUCTION

At first glance, it may seem that the capital turnover considered in chapter XXII refers to just one of the possible specific options within the scope of personal consumption. In fact, this capital turnover is general in nature, since it goes beyond capitalist relations. In this role, capital turnover creates conditions for reducing costs not only for society, but also for private business. In turn, reducing costs in final consumption accelerates progress many times over. Outside capitalist relations, capital dialectically takes the form of a public resource, so the effectiveness of private initiative is as important to society as satisfying public interests. At the same time, private business can expand its production many times within the framework of public interest. It is important to understand that here we are not talking about the development of budget funds. Business in the system of accelerated capital turnover derives profit from the guaranteed growth of welfare (demand) of people and society.

The historical stage of capital, which is reflected in the present chapter, unfolds in the global process to socialized, when the era of socialized manking is rolling to replace civil society. The return of civil society to the non — national person is a natural dialectical return to its original essence at a more developed level. Capital itself is working frantically on socialized manking. In the rampant pursuit of labor productivity, which is a source of profit, capital creates and develops the conditions of its own socialized.

Therefore, it was important to understand and explore not the inventions about the society of the future beyond the boundaries of capital, but the actual process that «destroys» capitalist relations, overcoming them dialectically on the basis of the developed contradictions and the developed material conditions for overcoming them. Humanity sets itself only those social and historical tasks that it can solve. Because «upon closer examination, it always turns out that the task itself arises only when the material conditions of its solution are already evident, or, at least, are in the process of becoming».

Our discovery in the circulation of modern capital will not end the era of capitalism on the basis that society has not yet sufficiently developed productive forces so that 6 days of free time remain outside the necessary labor. Humanity does not yet have the technology of generating electricity using fusion, does not have closed — loop technologies, as it exists in nature. The amount of substance does not disappear anywhere, but we have not yet learned how to combine them constantly. And yet, already today, capitalism creates contradictions, the resolution of which takes a step beyond the boundaries of capitalist relations. These contradictions are due to the organic structure of capital, i.e. the ratio of fixed assets to the amount of human labor. In the current conditions, the amount of wages will always be less than the cost of expensive goods. For example, the cost of houses, cars, education, health care, urban infrastructure, etc. In modern society, public funds of municipal and regional authorities have also become the ultimate consumers. Their social needs are limited, while the cost of social infrastructure has increased with changes in the organic structure of capital. Therefore, to complete the turnover of capital, everyone is interested in a permanent loan. Banks, in order to return the loan issued for production, end consumers to meet their needs in full, manufacturers to continue their production.

Considering the modern credit system, we find that it reflects the processes that were formed at the end of the twentieth century. Today they are implemented in fixing the abstractness of the global turnover of goods and in the abstractness of money production. There is complete confidence that understanding the dialectical return to abstract money will allow us to look at production consumption as public consumption. That is why our research begins with the study of the dialectical return to abstract money.

The first four sections of chapter XXII provide a description of the discovery that takes capital beyond the boundaries of capitalist relations and which is of practical interest to society, especially to the bourgeois ruling class. Since our discovery is presented briefly, it will not be difficult for the reader to get acquainted with its content.

I. ABSTRACT MONEY

1) PROCESS AS SUCH

Capital is a modern historical form of society’s resource. This is just a certain stage in the development of the material and intellectual forces of people who enter into social relations and in which their resource can be realized today only in the form of capital. At the same time, the form of capital reflects the mobile basis of productive forces, the last, in turn, technologies developing on the scientific knowledge of man about the world and the experience of organizing the production process directly and public reproduction in general. On its long historical journey, which already dates back more than a thousand years, from its inception in the distant 9th—12th centuries to its triumph in the 18th century, capital is constantly in a rampant race for profit. The materialization of this increasing profit could be carried out only through labor productivity, respectively, through the development of technologies that displace human physical labor from the production process. It is labor productivity that forms the boundary of capitalist relations and leads it to the limit in the form of contradictions of capital turnover.

Capital passes its limit dialectically, like any process in our world — starting with the reflection of the opposite, the definition of contradiction and the removal of contradiction in its opposite. The opposite for capital, as the expression of a private resource, and in public relations, as private ownership of the means of production, is the resource of society, as public ownership of the productive forces of any manifestation thereof.

Already from the first moments and throughout the history of the primitive community, the division of labor, being within the boundaries of this community, generated an exchange of various parts of the resource. The more diverse the community’s resource became, the more the need arose to measure this exchange with a common equivalent. Such an equivalent within a community, where the exchange is conditional, abstract, must also be abstract. The abstract equivalent arises along with the development of culture within the community. Indeed, in the process of socializing a person, culture appears — something not so useful at first glance, intangible, something abstract, but obligatory for the existence of the private in public, as the whole variety of human relations to nature and to other people. Social justice arises with culture and its derivatives, as the correspondence and discrepancy between the understanding of the justice of an individual and the reality of social relations. It was public justice that expressed the universal equivalent of exchange within a primitive community. Justice is like abstract money, since money is just an expression of the universal equivalent of exchange.

At that time, the exchange was expressed as a universal fair distribution of the community’s resource, an exchange, as an exchange in general, as an abstract exchange. Because it was expressed in abstract justice. It is not at all important how much each member of the community got, the specific distribution was subordinated to the general task, first survival, then community development in the most effective way, with a certain structure of distribution. The existence of such an exchange was possible within the community, where the relationships of community members were subordinated to a single universal task — freedom from natural circumstances, through its opposite — dependence on the community. No wonder the expulsion from the community was equal to death for an individual, since his private resource was not enough to survive in harsh natural circumstances.

The movement of human society from a certain moment allows you to increase the resource of the community by a sufficient amount so that this resource goes beyond the community, i.e. can be exchanged for another resource. The exchange outside the community loses abstractness, universality and takes on specificity. Now outside the community, a thing that within the community, participating in the exchange (distribution) had universality and thus only consumer value, acquires a new property — the value of the exchange. The measurement of the new property implicitly pointed to the basis of the produced things of the community, which is human labor and its productivity. The reason for the appearance of material money is indicated by K. Marx. «This is consistent with our earlier view that the development of products into goods arises from the exchange between different communities, and not between members of the same community.»

It is through the value of exchange and its increase, which would seem to be the opposite of universality, that the process of returning to universality is launched. Although at the initial stage of the historical path, various things acted as a material form of money due to the underdevelopment of exchange in an undeveloped commodity form. Hence money is not the fruit of our consciousness or trust, but the product of our trivial exchange, the intuitive commensurate of human labor. Therefore, we observe a long period when various goods could and should have served as the equivalent of an exchange.

It should be noted here that fixing the size of the community’s resource, its materialization, no matter what abstract nature and potential the resource possesses, is carried out during exchange. It does not matter whether such an exchange takes place within the community or outside it. Exchange, as a natural intrinsic property of human society, generates money in a form that reflects the development of exchange. Thus, the resource is indirectly always expressed in money. In the form of money that corresponds to the development of the resource and its exchange in society. If within the community the exchange does not take the form of a commodity, and that is why it is forced to express itself in abstract money, then abroad the community, acquiring singularity, it transforms the thing into a contradictory form of the commodity, where the consumer value is opposed by the exchange value — the expression of universal human labor 11). At the same time, even a single quite material exchange is forced to resort to abstraction of the universality of human labor, as such, in order to express the exchange value of the thing, preserving the inextricability of the dialectical movement inherent in socialization of mankind.

Abstract money gave way to material money. A variety of commodity money, with the expansion of exchange, required a more effective form of material money. Metal money became such a form that reflected the increased exchange. Naturally, precious metals have become a new form of money. The movement from the many equivalents of exchange, which was commodity money, with the expansion of exchange, as well as with an increase in its diversity, required the unification of the process, and it ended in two forms of metal money — silver and gold money. Simplifying the exchange process entailed even more exchange. At the same time, we must understand that at the heart of everything was the development of productive forces, which required the division of labor, accordingly, entailed the specialization of producers of material goods and a new variety of goods. The historical process of developing productive forces, expressed in money, reflected the capabilities of a private person as the opposite of the universality of the resource, creating private owners and destroying the isolation of the community, brought the community to a new level of development — a private state. In this new public institute, only the amount of money could reflect the amount of resource that has become a private resource. Already non — abstract money more and more determined wealth. At the same time, people and the land on which people mined their livelihoods for several century, in parallel with money, were of no less value. In this historical period, which is represented according to the level of development of productive forces and which disintegrates essentially into two eras of slave and feudal relations, money also had a completely material expression, as the amount of precious metal. In order for money to break away from its material essence, it will take a specific era — the era of capital.