Posted by: graemebird | April 28, 2009

Cambria On The Ball: Technological Advancement Is Embedded In Capital Update.

The reasons we cannot assume that technical innovation can arrive in time are the following.

1. Technical innovation is just the visible part of the ice-berg. Or just the icing on the cake. That technical innovation we see as members of the public is what I’m talking about here.

In reality TECHNICAL INNOVATION IS EMBEDDED IN CAPITAL UPDATE. And it implies not just the design of the plasma screen. But for that updated plasma screen to be economic the suppliers of the manufacturer would also need capital update, their suppliers and the foreigners they outsource to. And their suppliers too. Which is why the Concord was pulled from service as miraculous as it was. Because it was the icing on the cake without the cake.

2. So we have said that profitable technological update is and must be imbedded in capital update. But you see capital investment is ENERGY EXPENSIVE. Or more commonly ENERGY INTENSIVE….. Capital update needs energy.

And to run that new capital requires energy also, with puny energy-efficiencies as a secondary concern. Furthermore capital update doesn’t just mean better machines at every stage of the process. Boehm Bawerk tells us that capital update means A LENGTHENING OF THE STRUCTURE OF PRODUCTION.

So what we are saying here is that though energy efficiencies may be going on in the background all the time BE THAT AS IT MAY…. in the first instance a progressing economy means an increase in per capita energy usage because of the lengthening of the structure of production.

3. Since technological development is imbedded in capital update. And since capital update means greater energy usage………. But there is a third factor to consider.

You need capital goods to gather energy. You can gather as much energy as you want but its capital goods that gather that energy.

4. Putting it altogether we see that energy is essential for capital update. Which is essential for technological development.

All the way down the line.

So Cambria is quite right but he understates his case. If we put everything on a throw of the dice on some energy system that the socialists choose we will lose that bet. The entire bet is going forward on the basis of ignorance of economic science.

Advertisements

Responses

  1. Feel the hatred for a harmless old man who gave to charity on this thread

    http://larvatusprodeo.net/2009/04/29/richard-pratt-and-the-great-and-the-good/

  2. They are sickening pigs aren’t they. He built it up from scratch after coming here penniless. He’s been a great benefactor of us all. He escaped fascists just like those Prodeo ones. It would have been nice if he had been able to go through his sickness without this riff-raff biting the hand that feeds them.

  3. The hate of this guy is so disgusting you just want to vomit after reading the LP thread.

    I despise them so, so much for what they are saying.

  4. SITE DIETY SEZ: I WILL TRACK YOU DOWN FOR THAT CD YOU ASSHOLE.

  5. HEY FUCK YOU IDIOT. HE WAS A FOUNDER-OWNER. HE HAS ORIGINAL RIGHTS. HE IS NOT LIKE SOME MIDDLE-MANAGER IN A WORLD OF GOVERNMENT CREATED CORPORATE BODIES. HE WAS THE REAL DEAL. THIS WAS HIS GEAR AND HE COULD MORALLY SELL IT FOR ANY PRICE HE LIKED AND IN TRUTH HE WAS PROBABLY JUST HELPING HIS COMPETITOR TO FACE THE MUSIC THROUGH THE HARD TIMES, AND HELPING HIMSELF TO HIGHER MARGINS TO REINVEST IN TECHNOLOGY.

    NOTHING AGAINST THE GENERAL INTEREST. AND NOT THE SAME AS SOME CORPORATE NIGHTMARE RUN LOOSE FROM ITS FOUNDING VISION.

    DON’T YOU SAY ANOTHER BAD WORD ABOUT HIM OR I’LL KILL YOU AND YOUR SHADOW AND WHEN YOUR GHOST POKES HIS HEAD OUT IN HOPEFUL FASHION I’LL MURDER HIM FLAT OUT AS WELL.

  6. …and then you’ll push Penny Wong in the pool. You’re such a wuss.

    But Pratt admitted his guilt so he was still a corporate criminal.

  7. I was just exploring the most severe limits allowable for economic vandals that do damage to our sovereignty. The attitude is this far and no further and anything more severe would be too severe.

    Pratt wasn’t guilty of anything. He just broke the law. Its the law thats guilty. As FOUNDER-owner particularly its his property and he ought to have been able to sell stuff at any price he likes.

    I was really happy when they dropped the charges. I was thinking that at last these riff-raff are showing a bit of decency. I didn’t realise they only dropped the prosecution when he was just about to die.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Categories

%d bloggers like this: