Blow English Subtitles Streaming

Schydlowsky (II)

3) Depreciation of machinery.

Schydlowsky The next argument is that productivity growth does not come free, requires new machines, or a new technology, which requires a payment (amortization, royalty, etc.), Therefore the benefits Innovation can not go only to workers.
is true that we need to write off machinery and royalties, but it is true that this criterion is to be distributed over the new production. The capital never tells the worker: "we have this over: I will take it only what you need to justify the machine, and the rest divided up between you and me. " So things do not work. What the capital is simply grab the ecedente all to himself, and continue to pay the worker the same wage. Not even have to show the employee how new surplus has been obtained. The employee is not entitled to it. Perhaps, if a union, you can get (after fighting hard for it) a modest increase in their wages. Increase, of course, also depends on how much new production surplus has been obtained, but simply how much you can boot to the strength of the employer.
If we are the example of the seamstress (who showed in our response to Rothgiesser ), we see that the eight additional poles obtained in the second half of the day, are, in principle, the capitalist (and , together with the four poles that were already theirs, do u total of twelve). From there, the seamstress will have to find a way to start something for themselves, which can only be achieved through struggle. And there, too, the capital may redeem the new technology. But both operations are unfavorable to the worker. Why?. Let's see.

miserable is disadvantageous party can increase the salary, because it can only be achieved with unions (non-existent in this new savage capitalism, for the vast majority), and only if the fight reaches its goal (which also occurs in all cases). Is unfavorable, as shown by statistics, because the share of GDP for capital gains is increasing, while the share of wages is decreasing (which Campodonico, in the case of Peru, called the " crocodile mouth "). Suppose, optimistically, that our costumer get a hefty increase ... 25%!. How much is that? Equal to the margin obtained from a surplus of twelve poles (four they were the utility company before, and eight have been added.) The other eleven are being held by the capitalist.
is unfavorable throughout the remainder of the additional production because it will get nothing, arguing that this part (which seems to hold Schydlowsky) should be used to pay off the technology. But the truth is that the depreciation of the new machine is always less than the surplus obtained. How do we know?. Very simple: because otherwise, the capitalist would not have to put new machinery.
If a machine is sold (as the machine Sewing in our example) capable of producing a seamstress than previously produced two, is precisely because this machine can save the capital's salary of the two seamstresses that were previously needed to produce the sixteen poles and because the employer knows that the depreciation of the new machine is less than the salary that you will save.
and is declining further as the cost of the machines is steadily declining (it is known, for example, that computers become cheaper by half every five years).
In short, it is not the capital read: "I will separate, of new surplus, part of the repayment, and the rest is divided up. " It says that capital is "all new surplus belongs to me, because that's the rules of the game. Even discounting all that new surplus increases that workers can obtain, and the amortization of the machine, everything else still remains in the hands of capital.

And stating that we are not discussing here whether such a thing is right or wrong. Suppose one considers that this is fair, so are the rules. Well, but the problem is not to be (or not) right. The problem is that, if the surplus is lagging (as shown) in the hands of capital (however that might be considered just that), are generated the codiciones to occur all the misfortunes that described in the video :
First : layoffs, because the employer disregarded one of the two seamstresses that were previously needed to produce the sixteen poles.
Second : unemployment (a result of dismissal).
Third : falling rate of profit (because accumulate in the hands of capital surplus, a growing portion of constant capital, and decreases in terms on the capital variable).
Fourth: As a result of the falling rate of profit, capital to pressure the worker to extend his journey, to intensify its work and cut their benefits ( the latter by way of precarious employment).