|
營(yíng)口翻譯公司關(guān)鍵字：Marx's theory of surplus value of his labor theory of value - that value creation and value of decision theory - the derivatives. Because of his labor theory of value is completely wrong, so the correctness of the theory of surplus value also goes without saying.
Capitalist society (or under private ownership) of goods of economic activity, is indeed widespread labor exploitation, however, labor exploitation is not the only source of profit, or even may not be the main source. Because the above-mentioned "all productive factors, ie resources are wealth creators", and so-called profits, in fact, the capitalists in the business activities and the net wealth, that is, excluding the cost of a net increase of wealth of wealth. Therefore, the so-called "residual value" is not capitalist production (economic activity) for the sole purpose or fundamental purpose.
At the same time, labor exploitation is not the only enemy of social and economic equity, but not the biggest enemy. The greatest enemy of social and economic equity is the main enemy of resources or the possession and consumption (use) is not fair. Of course, labor (labor) is also a resource.
Furthermore, Marx's theory of basic economic law is wrong.My research found that about all the basic law of social and economic activities, namely, the basic economic laws, is "to minimize production cost utility maximization principle (principle)," rather than Marx's "equivalence principle." If you do not take into account Marx's "value creation, value of the decision" wrong theory itself, "equivalence principle" is at best, the most basic economic law that "utility maximization principle of minimum production cost", in which only a small minor. In fact, "equivalent" is just a "swap" tautology. Because "exchange" itself means "equal." Therefore, the so-called "equivalence principle" is almost not worth mentioning.
ThreeThree theories mentioned above, namely, "value creation and value decisions (factors)" theory, theory of surplus value, the basic economic law theory is the foundation of Marx's labor theory of value and the trunk is the foundation of Marxist political economy. And these three theories are completely wrong, or almost completely wrong. Description of Marxist political economy is a theoretical system almost completely wrong.
A theory in practice and are almost completely wrong theory (system), how to guide our practice and economic theory, and also as the (truth) standards?
And even if the Marxist political economy (labor theory of value system) is completely correct, it can as we all actions (economic practice and theory) of the guidelines and standards? Not to say that only one standard of truth, that "practice" it?
Marx was one hundred in one, and is "one" only, why Marxist theory to cover everything, why is the top one hundred to one? Why only use one and the rest of ninety-nine hard waste? This is not a serious anti-scientific approach?
So, we said that China's economic problems, in essence, not the so-called 'Soviet paradigm', but rather "Kongsheng Fan" type of problem, is that "a Confucian Domination and 100 furniture waste," " cries and immobility alone a horse, "" thriving and flowers hold "superstition, myth, anti-science" feudal paradigm "issue.
So, I want to ask out loud here: What should China Whither economics? Marx's theory should continue to "deification" or should be to "all" of? We have to superstition or to science?
|