209
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 17 May 2025
209 points (95.2% liked)
Asklemmy
49762 readers
460 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
It sounds like it's similar to saying climate change isn't real because the weather was colder one day, when in actuality the theory of global warming is describing an ongoing process and tendency of the temperature to increase in the overall system overall long period of time, it's not a day to day weather phenomenon you can describe with a singular slice of time.
Sort of, not quite. The TRPF is closer to saying "if Capitalists continue to automate and improve production, ie if c/v increases, ie if the organic composition of capital increases, then the rate of profit will fall unless exploitation, ie s/v, increases."
s/v can be increased in a number of ways, from increasing intensity, to Imperialism, ie using far more brutal exploitation in foreign countries.
Climate Change is similar in that the TRPF is a tendency, and temperature vaires on a daily basis, but the key difference is that while the TRPF does exist, ways of countering it temporarily also exist, while Climate Change isn't "countered" when it gets colder for a day. It's similar, but I wanted to point it out.
Also, absolute profits and the rate of profit are different, absolute profits have been rising, and rise most by producing and selling more. This is why c/v must rise in Capitalism, you can't just keep stagnating.
You can probably counter climate change temporarily, too. For example, dumping increasingly larger ice cubes in the ocean every year.
But ya, the analogy isn't completely one to one, it was just another good example of a a high level system-wide tendency that must be examined over a whole system and over a longer period of time that I thought most people reading would be familiar with.
That's a bit different to how rates of profit declining are countered, though.
No, this is showing a counterexample, which would render the original theory moot. If we find a planet tomorrow that pushes you away rather than attracting you, then Newton's theory of gravitation is (probably) no longer a valid model of the real world, or would have to be revised. That is just how science works.
Ah see, there's the problem. I don't think it's like Newton's Theory of Gravitation. The rate of profit to fall isn't some ironclad law that's applicable in all cases 100% of the time. Cowbee already conceded various ways it could not be true (lack of competition such as through monopoly, exploitation of workers, globalization and imperialism, cartels, trusts, etc).
It seems to describe the natural tendency of a system-wide phenomenon (assuming increasing automation and existing competition in capitalism but nothing really else), so you'd have to consider a macro view of the entire system over a long period of time for it to work. It's like how you can't say one section of the world has been getting colder or staying the same for a couple years and thus climate change has been debunked, as you not only need to look at the whole planet but then the next couple decades as well.
So the next company has a brief increase in rate of profit, but then taking a more extended look at the system, everyone will probably switch suppliers to the cheaper wood and someone is going to lower their prices, forcing everyone else to (barring one of the scenarios above).