Will capital disappear in the future? Is the existence of capital justified? 100

Capital is not going away. At least for a long time in the future, it will not disappear, because most of the countries in Europe are still following the capitalist line, and there are very few socialist countries like us, and although the global economy is diversified, it is also circulating with each other, and it will definitely have an impact on each other for a period of time in the future.

Capital is not going to disappear. But in our communist country. Capital is not allowed to exist, and each of us is a proletariat.

In the future, capital will not disappear, and the existence of capital is rational.

Capital will not disappear in the future, and its existence is very reasonable.

Surely it will not disappear, if it disappears, some projects will not be allowed to get such an investment, so I think such a phenomenon will not happen, and if it happens, it will definitely affect the economic conditions of many people.

Even the most extreme cases don't go away, don't ask why. Because human beings have not yet developed to that stage, and even if they do, it is still the law of survival in the animal world. Are there really as many smart people as you think?

You say that black technology is still possible. I learned that every company needs accounting. Accounting for this profession.

In fact, I think that capital must have the need to exist, if capital does not exist, it will make many people start to not have such a good mentality, and they will not work hard to do things, so capitalists must need to exist.

Excuse me, your capital will disappear. Is this book a right? Generally, it can't disappear, you have to have that foundation, and once something happens, you can take it out.

No, the ideal country is difficult to achieve!

Not at the moment. Without capital, there is no investment, and there is no way for the economy to continue to develop. While capital pursues profits, it also indirectly creates employment and wealth, which is an indispensable element of the market economy.

Yes,Capitalism.

The dying of capitalism does not stem from the proletarian revolution, but from the disappearance of profits, and the driving force for the emergence and development of capitalism lies in profits, and if profits are constantly diminishing or zero, and private investment is no longer profitable, capitalism will die. "At this point, there will be a more or less static state, and capitalism, which is essentially an evolutionary process, will gradually shrink and decline.

At this time, the entrepreneur will have nothing to do and will find himself in the same position as the generals who completely ensure a peaceful society. The bourgeoisie living on profits and interest will disappear, and a very sober socialism may emerge automatically. This is a description of the future society after capitalism by the economist Schumpeter.

The contradiction between capitalism and democracy is deepening day by day:

As the crisis evolved, the post-war marriage of capitalism and democracy came to an end. World war ii.

Later, in Keynesianism.

Guided by the belief that democracy is based on the ability of the state to intervene in the market on behalf of the interests of the people, and to correct the adverse consequences of the market for the benefit of the citizens, thus creating a situation in which capitalism and democracy are compatible.

For the first 20 years, the system worked well in Europe and the United States. But after the Cold War, Hayek.

Guided by the doctrine, fairness is seen as a burden to efficiency, which leads to a continuous increase in inequality. Then, economic crisis after crisis.

Question its legitimacy.

Inequality is accompanied by incompetence, which manifests itself in growing public debt and the dedemocratization of economic decision-making. Debt deficits** are opportunistic.

The campaign promises of politicians who buy the support of short-sighted voters with money they don't have. By replacing taxes with debt, countries** are further exacerbating inequality. Growing public debt can and is becoming a political argument for cutting state spending and public services.

Rationale for privatization.

I don't think so, because capital is a necessary prerequisite for the development of every country and society.

New changes in capitalism and its future direction.

Abstract: In the more than half century after the Second World War, capitalism has undergone new changes after a series of crises. The capitalist productive forces have developed, and some links in their relations of production and superstructure, as well as the operational and management mechanisms of the capitalist economy and society, have done a lot of self-regulation, improvement, and improvement.

Key words: capitalism; new changes; future directions; Productivity; Relations.

Introduction After World War II, there were many new changes in capitalism, including five types of industrial outcomes. However, regardless of whether or not this change in capitalism has led to economic development, it cannot be ruled out that it is essentially rotten. Although it may remain in a state of decay for a relatively long period of time, or even achieve rapid development, it will inevitably be wiped out eventually.

1. New changes in capitalism and their causes.

1.A new twist on capitalism.

1) The rapid development of science and technology has opened up new space for the development of the capitalist productive forces.

The third scientific and technological revolution, with the developed countries of the West as the main source of development, is a tremendous historical leap in the process of mankind's understanding of the world and the transformation of nature. All of this has elevated human beings from the era of large-scale machine production to the era of automated production with information technology as the core. As a result of the scientific and technological revolution, the productive forces of capitalist society have been continuously developed.

2. The future direction of capitalism.

1) The inherent contradictions of capitalism determine that capitalism must be replaced by socialism First of all, the basic contradictions of capitalism "contain the germ of all modern conflicts". Second, capital accumulation drives the intensification of the basic contradictions of capitalism and ultimately the negation of capitalism itself.

Thirdly, state monopoly capitalism, the highest form of socialization of capital, will be the prelude to socialism.

Finally, there are two classes in capitalist society: the bourgeoisie and the proletariat.

2) State monopoly capitalism, the highest form of socialization of capital, will be a prelude to socialism.

3) The transition from capitalism to socialism is a long-term historical process.

First of all, the existence of any social form has relative stability, and it takes a considerable time span from its emergence to its decline.

Second, the uneven development of capitalism determines the long-term nature of the transition.

Finally, the development of contemporary capitalism also shows the space for the productive forces to be accommodated by the relations of production.

ConclusionAlthough capitalism has undergone many new changes, whether or not such changes have led to economic development, it will inevitably be eliminated after all.

You look closely at Hong Kong.

Hong Kong's capitalism is basically Li Ka-shing's people.

It can be called oligarchic capitalism.

In such an environment, the middle and lower classes of Hong Kong's people will have great mood swings, and as Hong Kong's oligarchs become more and more powerful, the people's living standards will become more and more disparity compared with those of the monopoly class.

The mentality of hating the rich will become more and more serious, and the poor who hate the rich will gradually struggle, and then new groups, new ideas, and new factions will emerge that are equally rich.

Actually, it's already already happening.

The two strata have fought repeatedly.

Oligarchic capitalism will be replaced by ** capitalism.

Thus establishing socialism under the ownership of the whole people.

Individual capitalism is certainly allowed at this time.

But ** capital will be much larger, and in order to prevent monopoly, it will definitely participate in shares, and at this time, ** dominant ownership by the whole people is the initial stage of socialism, which is the integration process you are talking about.

Of course, the world is too big, but Hong Kong is very small, Hong Kong is developed, and it is an oligarch, and it is faster to enter socialism, but we ignore Macao, in fact, Macao is now much more advanced than Hong Kong in terms of social form.

Private ownership Everyone knows that most of the things in China do not belong to individuals Even the land of farmers is not entirely owned by individuals, but collectives This is the biggest fat and the most difficult piece to integrate I think private ownership is the most difficult to integrate a piece of cake Just look at the forced demolition everywhere Nominally it is your personal But in reality, the court does not protect you** for the sake of development for personal selfish desires Forced demolition The developer has ** as a backing, what else can he be afraid of? Completely private ownership, some civilians are not greedy enough, and there is no ** his private things, so *** issued a compensation ordinance, but what is the use? We say that the legal system is the key to resolving social contradictions, and it is also the last line of defense, but it is a pity that the courts do not enforce it in accordance with the law, and when individual ownership and development meet, private ownership is particularly important, and it is also pale and powerless, and capitalism is encroaching on socialism, which is happening, and the authorities also know that it is a pity that it is not the time to solve it, so they can't see it and can't hear it.

The essence of capitalism is the monopoly of capital, which derives from the socialization of production, but the resources are owned by private capitalists. Let's put it this way, everyone works to create, and the result is owned by a small number of people, maybe some people say, people have money, pay you wages, what's wrong! But let's not forget that our labor is the greatest, because the value of labor is value-added and infinite.

The fact that capitalism still exists shows that it can also accommodate the social mode of production. The West is also constantly improving capitalism through the strengthening of social responsibility, but this is only to alleviate the contradictions. Some people say that socialism is very valuable, you can read Marxism-Leninism, Das Kapital, etc.

You say that capitalism and socialism are integrated, but this is not scientific. Socialism is built on the basis of highly developed capitalism, born out of capitalist society, we have not gone from a powerful feudal society, experienced decades of capital development, and suddenly transferred to a socialist country, and do not have the conditions for the immediate implementation of socialism in all aspects, so we are in the primary stage of socialism, by allowing the operation of capital, to realize the accumulation of capital in the state and society, and to realize the accumulation of the basic and basic foundation of socialist politics, economy, culture, society and other aspects. Therefore, there is socialism with our characteristics.

Of course, there is a lot to say about this topic, and it is impossible to finish it in two or three sentences.

Isms are people's ideas and ideas, which belong to people's subjective consciousness, which you can believe in with your comrades, but you can't impose them on everyone, just like you can't get everyone to believe in Buddhism. People's perceptions will change with the development of society, and it is difficult to say what kind of doctrine it will become. At the very least, the capitalist system has adapted to the development needs of industrialized societies and will exist for a long time.

Private ownership is in line with human nature, and it allows the property and intellectual property rights of individuals to be recognized and protected by law. This provides a good institutional guarantee for the development of individuals and enterprises;

Market economy, free competition, survival of the fittest, fair for any economic participant, conducive to the growth of modern enterprises;

Production relations, employment and being employed, in line with the needs of modern enterprise development, there are occasional strikes due to wages, but as long as money can solve the problem, it is not a thing. People are equal to each other, have the right to dialogue, and do not cause tension in the relationship. As for the exploitation of the surplus labor value of the workers by the capitalists, it is ridiculous not to say more.

The gap between the rich and the poor is caused by many reasons, but as long as the rights and interests of low-income people can be protected and the society has a sound system to protect their lives, there will be no problems.

As for the Datong society like communism, I don't believe it can be realized. First of all, few people can be content, and no matter how abundant the materials are, some people are insatiable. Secondly, the whole people are publicly owned, and they can get it without work, who wants to work?

How to restrain the lazy? Look at the present, there is no need to say more.

In fact, if you look at foreign countries, you will have a clear understanding of this question.

First of all, you have to understand these two, in fact, socialism is an ideal state, and it is impossible for it to be realized.

In fact, the current capitalist countries are not only capitalism, they have socialism, you can see it from the financial problems, help bankrupt countries or anti-monopoly policies, etc., these are the main characteristics of socialism, so it is better to read the meaning of the two isms carefully, and then find a country, compare his policies, it is very clear.

Whatever the doctrine, the whole world is working hard to develop the economy. Except for a handful of rogue states. For ordinary people, material and spiritual prosperity is king.

The struggle between capital and socialism, that is, the struggle for the rights of the unified class, has no meaning for the ordinary people. Personally, I think that socialism ignores human nature and is somewhat illusory. Otherwise, there would be no socialism with special characteristics.

Truth is premised and not applicable everywhere.

When capitalism develops to a certain extent, it will naturally become socialist, just like the developed countries in Europe now, they have begun to pay for education and medical care, and even Switzerland pays the people free of charge every month. The social productive forces determine the nature of society, just like China, although it is said to be socialism with special characteristics, but the productive forces are still stupid and coarse, and the system is not perfect, so the people's living standards are far behind the developed countries.