Machinery and Modern Industry | Chapter 15

This video covers Chapter 15 of Das Kapital.

[tt]

4:33 Marx argues in Value, Price and Profit (I believe) and in Section 6 of the chapter that, although workers would be laid out from technological advancements, those same laborers would still be working in order to make a living, which forces them to work for worse and worse wages. Advancement in technology does not always result in lower employment rate, but it just means that the value of labor-power depreciates more and more, and the living conditions of workers would be worse.

[James-wfnu]

These videos are so good - hope you keep making them!!!

[logan]

The employment rate has improved but the capitalist mode of production has changed so much the comparing the two periods based on employment is apples to oranges

[raymondhartmeijer]

Well, I was reading David Harvey, and he pointed out that the use of machinery is not necessarily a one direction path from simple to full scale machinery. He found that in some industry in China, machines for that particular industry in use were seen as too expensive/didn't generate the amount of surplus, so they choose to go back to using large groups of labourers as they would actually be cheaper for the capitalist.
further, capitalism is famous for advertising new needs and desires in the market, new productlines, new fashions etc. That might play a big role in keeping people employed. Just look at the rate people buy new smartphones or computers for example

[areebsiddiqi]

Great work bro. Why don't you have a patreon?

[oliverastankovic]

Also, read “ Understanding Marxism” by Dr. Richard Wolff.

[lenwilson]

I don't think machines that replace workers create as many jobs as are lost. This is obvious because, if they did, the machines would cost as much or more to buy and maintain than the workers they were replacing. This would make them useless for creating more surplus value. To put it another way, in order for a machine to create more surplus value, the necessary labour needed to create and maintain the machine must be less than the necessary labour involved in the process it is replacing.

However, this does not necessarily mean that technological development always leads to less jobs in an economy, as when new technology is invented it can create new markets where new jobs can be created. For example the job of a Youtuber needs broadband internet, an example of a new job created by new technology. The fact that technology can create as well as take away jobs is not an argument in favour of Capitalism however, as constantly changing labour markets make workers feel insecure and powerless. In a worker controlled society technology could give people more free time, meaning they have more ability to be innovative in other areas in their life.

[christianjarquin]

It’s not about whether machines are good or bad. (We need machines. They’re are not going anywhere). It’s about whether those machines are privately or socially (democratically) owned or not. Marx would want machines to be socially owned.

[NguyenHung-vpwo]

Thanks for your effort. I really enjoy the way you review the books, but I think you should try crowdfunding model instead of relying on amazon affiliate (I don't like to support Amazon)

[saswatabiswas]

Pure nonsense .Marx himself contradicts .Later he acknowledged that machine has commodity akso generates surplus

[srikumarmondal]

You can't see the labour displacement by simply looking at the historical difference between employment rate, because like today, in history there was not so much demand for manufactured commodities as well, without demand there was no need to produce more and employ more....