He’s basically saying that if a firm innovates, it provides a cost savings for themselves that increases the profit without having to squeeze workers, and that the savings for the customers down the supply chain from them also provide increased profits.
However, capitalist firms don’t innovate. So his cute little theory is bullshit.
I've never heard of the Okishio's Theorem until now, but I'm not sure your objection holds up to your own rewording. Capitalists would prefer not to innovate on their own dime, but there is competitive advantage to be had by improving production technology and reducing input cost and so on, so they offload that to the general population through things like DARPA and the Pentagon etc that fund R & D. So they get the innovation without actually having done it themselves.
Also, most "innovation" is figuring out how to do your books so you can pay workers less. There isn't much real innovation when it's much more efficient to just cut workers wages and barrel headfirst into catastrophe then use the collective as a sponge to soak up your mess.
True. Innovation on the public dime could also increase rate of profit, but capitalism also tends to drive public investment down even when it benefits them long term, so I feel like that is still a pretty big hole in the theory.
He’s basically saying that if a firm innovates, it provides a cost savings for themselves that increases the profit without having to squeeze workers, and that the savings for the customers down the supply chain from them also provide increased profits.
However, capitalist firms don’t innovate. So his cute little theory is bullshit.
I've never heard of the Okishio's Theorem until now, but I'm not sure your objection holds up to your own rewording. Capitalists would prefer not to innovate on their own dime, but there is competitive advantage to be had by improving production technology and reducing input cost and so on, so they offload that to the general population through things like DARPA and the Pentagon etc that fund R & D. So they get the innovation without actually having done it themselves.
deleted by creator
Also, most "innovation" is figuring out how to do your books so you can pay workers less. There isn't much real innovation when it's much more efficient to just cut workers wages and barrel headfirst into catastrophe then use the collective as a sponge to soak up your mess.
True. Innovation on the public dime could also increase rate of profit, but capitalism also tends to drive public investment down even when it benefits them long term, so I feel like that is still a pretty big hole in the theory.
deleted by creator