This question <19|43> overall <39|41> Oj: <39|41>.  
  Question 7: Why does Marx discuss the form and not the content of wealth?   
  [40] Oj: Marx describes the form, because it gives a sense of assurance to the people, a plan of action. Yet, this sense of assurance is really a false one. The form of a socialist or capitalist government looks great on paper. The government provides jobs for the people. It educates everyone to perform a task, moreover, it enables men and women to provide for their families. The content of the wealth is not so great to hear about. The reality of the system is that all people do not have jobs, all people are not able to provide housing and food for their children. People work as peasants out on the privately owned farmland of the rich owners for hardly anything at all. People are still without homes, without food, children are growing up poor. These are the reasons that Marx speaks nothing of the content and substance of wealth.   
  Hans: I agree with the sentiments which you are expressing here, but this is a complete misunderstanding of the questions. The question asked about the content and form of wealth, not that of our social institutions. And also your understanding of the content-- form distinction is different than Marx's. I explained that in [43]. See also [69]  
 
 
 
  Students enrolled for Econ 5080 in 2009fa are invited to give feedback to the above message
Pseudonym:      UofU ID:  
Text: