Ultimately there is always some financing. Erstwhile socialist countries also had a Ministry of Finance and a Central Bank (eg Gosbank). Workers have to be paid, they have to buy goods and services.
There's a pretty big qualitative difference between privately controlled central banks that safeguard the interests of the international bourgeoisie, like the US Federal Reserve, vs China's state operated financial ecosystem. China is ultimately not in the business of making money out of money, they use finance as a means to an end of mutual development with their trading partners.
they use finance as a means to an end of mutual development with their trading partners.
Huh, that explains why. So finance under socialism, unlike Industry or Agriculture, is not really an economic sector as much as it is a tool, which explains the predominance of industry in socialist countries.
Yeah, exactly, because finance doesn't produce anything. Broadly speaking, any money a financier takes home is rent. A socialist country should understand that finance doesn't produce any value by itself, and is only capable of extracting profits by stripping the value away from industry in the form of rents. That phenomenon is the whole driving force of imperialism: where industrial capital is the centralizing force that socializes labor and unites it with capital to produce commodities at a large scale, finance capital goes backward and deindustrializes an economy by adding more friction between industrial capital and labor; eventually finance capital captures industrial capital completely and gains freedom of movement across the world, and when finance capital can freely move across the world it quickly starts to divide it and claim it for the interest of large capitalists.
I like this brief Yanis Varoufakis interview in China where he explains how China and the US are totally different in how they've managed financial crises.
Makes sense... IDC if its under govt control, finance is finance
Ultimately there is always some financing. Erstwhile socialist countries also had a Ministry of Finance and a Central Bank (eg Gosbank). Workers have to be paid, they have to buy goods and services.
There's a pretty big qualitative difference between privately controlled central banks that safeguard the interests of the international bourgeoisie, like the US Federal Reserve, vs China's state operated financial ecosystem. China is ultimately not in the business of making money out of money, they use finance as a means to an end of mutual development with their trading partners.
Huh, that explains why. So finance under socialism, unlike Industry or Agriculture, is not really an economic sector as much as it is a tool, which explains the predominance of industry in socialist countries.
Yeah, exactly, because finance doesn't produce anything. Broadly speaking, any money a financier takes home is rent. A socialist country should understand that finance doesn't produce any value by itself, and is only capable of extracting profits by stripping the value away from industry in the form of rents. That phenomenon is the whole driving force of imperialism: where industrial capital is the centralizing force that socializes labor and unites it with capital to produce commodities at a large scale, finance capital goes backward and deindustrializes an economy by adding more friction between industrial capital and labor; eventually finance capital captures industrial capital completely and gains freedom of movement across the world, and when finance capital can freely move across the world it quickly starts to divide it and claim it for the interest of large capitalists.
I like this brief Yanis Varoufakis interview in China where he explains how China and the US are totally different in how they've managed financial crises.