Karl Marx is one figure held central to economic theory and practise, born in 1818, his two most popular books, The Communist Manifesto and Das Kapital. (The History Guide. 2008)
Marxism more recently is the term attributed to Karl Marx, it can be visually observed to compose the substratum of communism. David Ricardo another central figure in economic theory, born much before Marx in 1772, he was an adherent of Adam Smith’s work, his key theory, the labour theory of value developed in the 19th century. (Investopedia. David Ricardo) In this essay I aim to dissect both theorist’s kindred attributes and differences and in the later stages draw upon what components of their theories I find utilizable and why.
To commence, Karl Marx was born in …show more content…
However, not just in the aspect of a person who wanted to destroy capitalism but highlighting root problems with the system, this leads to improvement in our economic system. In particular his issue of capitalism that workers get paid little while capitalists get rich. The main point being the capitalists shrink the wage of the workers to widen profit margin (primitive accumulation). Therefore, it can be seen as exploitation of workers, this to this day still happens with major companies such as Nike being in major trouble for using horrible conditions paying below minimum wage with people working in sweatshops abroad which ultimately stretches their profit margin. Marx theory of exploitation of labour pushes forward the idea that capital owners contribute nothing to the process of production, I disagree as for me the sheer risk of an investment from the capital owners, initially is what even allows the process to exist therefore their contribution can’t be undervalued in no means. Ultimately I do find Marx’s view on the economic class division useful I feel at the same time it’s very biased and unfair to some extent on
Marxism more recently is the term attributed to Karl Marx, it can be visually observed to compose the substratum of communism. David Ricardo another central figure in economic theory, born much before Marx in 1772, he was an adherent of Adam Smith’s work, his key theory, the labour theory of value developed in the 19th century. (Investopedia. David Ricardo) In this essay I aim to dissect both theorist’s kindred attributes and differences and in the later stages draw upon what components of their theories I find utilizable and why.
To commence, Karl Marx was born in …show more content…
However, not just in the aspect of a person who wanted to destroy capitalism but highlighting root problems with the system, this leads to improvement in our economic system. In particular his issue of capitalism that workers get paid little while capitalists get rich. The main point being the capitalists shrink the wage of the workers to widen profit margin (primitive accumulation). Therefore, it can be seen as exploitation of workers, this to this day still happens with major companies such as Nike being in major trouble for using horrible conditions paying below minimum wage with people working in sweatshops abroad which ultimately stretches their profit margin. Marx theory of exploitation of labour pushes forward the idea that capital owners contribute nothing to the process of production, I disagree as for me the sheer risk of an investment from the capital owners, initially is what even allows the process to exist therefore their contribution can’t be undervalued in no means. Ultimately I do find Marx’s view on the economic class division useful I feel at the same time it’s very biased and unfair to some extent on