this post was submitted on 23 Jan 2024
1523 points (97.4% liked)

tumblr

3452 readers
640 users here now

Welcome to /c/tumblr, a place for all your tumblr screenshots and news.

Our Rules:

  1. Keep it civil. We're all people here. Be respectful to one another.

  2. No sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia or any other flavor of bigotry. I should not need to explain this one.

  3. Must be tumblr related. This one is kind of a given.

  4. Try not to repost anything posted within the past month. Beyond that, go for it. Not everyone is on every site all the time.

  5. No unnecessary negativity. Just because you don't like a thing doesn't mean that you need to spend the entire comment section complaining about said thing. Just downvote and move on.


Sister Communities:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Via mastodon (alt text on the other side): https://deacon.social/@JulieB/111805263164082967

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 7 points 10 months ago (9 children)

Musk provides the Money required to fulfill the M-C-M' circuit, by which a sum of Money M is turned into a Commodity C which is then turned into a larger sum of Money M'. SpaceX is more of an RnD company than anything else at this point, so the required M is very high for a currently negative M'. Eventually, the goal is for SpaceX to turn profitable once it finishes enough of the initial design phase.

The thing is, anyone can provide M. The fact that Musk provides M for SpaceX does not mean there is a talent or skill being deployed by Musk that makes him any more special than anyone else. It's the Engineers that are designing the rockets, after all, not Musk.

Further still, there does not at all need to be an individual who provides M. The workers can collectively own Capital and vote on managers and how they wish to direct production, all without a petite Dictator, ie a Capitalist, who stands on top of the Workers for the pursuit of profit.

Another easy to envision example is 2 factories. One version is owned by a Capitalist, and the Workers have little to no power. The other is owned by the Workers, who elect a manager. Both have the same amount of labor (including management), but the latter example has a more equitable distribution of power via ownership.

Is any of this confusing for you? I can elaborate, if you wish.

load more comments (5 replies)