Discussion in 'world politics, current affairs and news' started by weltweit, May 18, 2012.
The only distinction is that foxconn produce a tangible good.
The latter couldn't exist without the former, the former however could exist without the latter. (and what is a Facebook programmer?)
Well, apart from this being quite a sizeable difference you're wrong. And you're still not getting that a single company making a profit doesn't mean that total capital therefore makes a profit.
Maybe you could show me the commonalities between a 1000 multi-millionaires and 10s of thousands of chinese workers? Why there is so many more of the latter and so few of the former?
Well considering foxconn are producing iphones and ipods, those devices couldnt exsist without the software to run them. From Apple's point of view the hardware is near irrelevant, where Apple adds value is the software.
Ok assemble the hardware without any software and see how much use you get.
You appear to be just going off on a tangent now. Anyway its friday night I've had enough, its been sort of interesting. However ultimately it looks like your argument is software cant produce surplus value, which I dont agree with.
I've not gone off on a tanget once throughout this discussion.I've been relentlessly focused (like a good laurie penny!). I've had no answers to repeated questions, i've had repeated misunderstandings of what i'm saying, i've answered every single question asked of me in return.
Googling "software as surplus value" brings up some interesting discussions similar to what we have been going at. It appears there are just two schools of thought on it.
Imagine that, i had no idea.
Just thought it was interesting that people with a similar level of interest in marx dont agree with your view. Which gives some weight to the idea that some of marx's ideas are now outdated with the changes that have occured.
But i haven't offered that view. Not once.
"all that is solid melts into air."
Well no you didn't - you offered it for me. Which is amusing at it's not a position that i hold or have ever held.
No, Its what I was getting to in http://www.urban75.net/forums/threads/the-facebook-public-launch.293556/page-4#post-11182957
It might well have been, but why insist that this position that i don't hold and have never held is what i was arguing? I never once argued such a thing. What does this say about what you based your replies to me on?
I was referring to marx being outdated.
Jesus suffering Christ.
When you specifically said that i was making a specfic argument that i didn't you were refering to marx being outdated? Have i that right? Been a long day has it?
Should keep him going in stupid hats for a while.
Every example of a software product provided you claimed it didnt create surplus value. Is there software that does?
Am i mad or did you claim this?
And no i didn't. I didn't say that about a single software product. Not one. There were no software examples offered to me - were there?
iTunes is a software product, so is facebook.
Ah you offered me itunes - one example, then felt justified in saying when i answered correctly that on this basis that i hold a view that i don't and never have done? And then pretending that you said no such thing then going on to argue that i was wrong to hold such a view that you didn't ever suggest that i held
I said it appeared/looks like you did. A suggestion.
You also said it was obvious that foxconn produced surplus value where a facebook software developer didnt.
Yet i didn't, and then you suggested that you had not offered any such readings of my posts. The immediately proceeded to try and prove me wrong on my belief that software could never produce surplus value.
Separate names with a comma.