[p2p-research] excellent contribution on flow money by Martien van Steenbergen

[Ryan Lanham]

How would you deal with a skyscraper or a large urban hydroponic farm?


Ryan Lanham




On Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 10:14 AM, Dmytri Kleiner <dk at telekommunisten.net>wrote:

> On Mon, 1 Jun 2009, Martien van Steenbergen wrote:
>
> There is only 1 definition, however it has hard to understand ad
> purposely misrepresented by neoclassical economics, which continue to
> dominate mainstream sources, and who's main purpose is to justify
> propertarian exploitation.
>
>      RENT
>>
>>      Confusingly, rent has two different meanings for economists. The
>> first is
>>      the commonplace definition: the INCOME from hiring out LAND or other
>> durable
>>
>
> This is misleading, the income from hiring out land is a price, and
> all prices are composed of rent, interest and wages, in most cases the
> main component of this price of land would be Rent, regardless of
> whether it was bought or hired.
>
>
>      goods. The second, also known as economic rent, is a measure of MARKET
>>      POWER: the difference between what a FACTOR OF PRODUCTION is paid and
>> how
>>      much it would need to be paid to remain in its current use. A soccer
>> star
>>      may be paid $50,000 a week to play for his team when he would be
>> willing to
>>      turn out for only $10,000, so his economic rent is $40,000 a week.
>>
>
> This is such garbage I have no idea where to begin. At the very least, it's
> a lousy example of rent. Not to mention that if he would be willing to
> play for 10K, why on earth is the team paying him 50?
>
> The quoted paragraph is gibberish from start to finish. As the old
> saying goes, "that's not right, that's not even wrong."
>
> The factors of production are Land, Labour, and Capital, and once again
> the price of a soccer player (like all prices) includes all three
> components Rent, Interest and Wages. In this case, being a person, is
> particularly difficult to divide between the three. The difference
> between the price of simple labour (wages) and that of skilled labour,
> imo, is better viewed as Interest, i.e. "Human Capital," than Rent in
> the case of Athlete. The example would have been slightly less
> ridiculous of they use a celebrity, who's income above simple wages can
> better be argued as rent (coming mostly from licencing). If you really
> would discuss this, we can, but it seems like the Georgist cartoon I linked
> provides a much better starting point. This is well into counting
> angels-dancing on the head of a pin territory, IMO.
>
>      In PERFECT COMPETITION, there are no economic rents, as
>> new FIRMS enter a
>>      market and compete until PRICES fall and all rent is eliminated.
>> Reducing
>>      rent does not change production decisions, so economic rent can be
>> taxed
>>      without any adverse impact on the real economy, assuming that it
>> really is
>>      rent.
>>
>
> Rent is the economic return to productive inputs when their supply can not
> be
> be increased by the application labour and capital, so the above is highly
> confused. New firms can not create Land. They can create Capital though, and
> so what is said above is true of Interest. However that's what the
> "Economist" does not want you to understand, in perfect competition, there
> can be no Interest. Capital can not capture any more that it's own
> reproduction costs, and so can not provide an income for a class of
> Capitalists, this Capitalism depends on restricting competition and
> rent-seeking.
>
> (yes Alfred, I'm ignoring quasi-rents for the moment),
>
>
> Kind Regards,
>
>
>
> --
> Dmytri Kleiner, aspiring crank
>
> http://www.telekommunisten.net
> _______________________________________________
> p2presearch mailing list
> p2presearch at listcultures.org
> http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listcultures.org/pipermail/p2presearch_listcultures.org/attachments/20090601/43ab905d/attachment-0001.html>