[ overboard / sfw / alt / cytube] [ leftypol / b / WRK / hobby / tech / edu / ga / ent / 777 / posad / i / a / R9K / dead ] [ meta ]

/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

"The anons of the past have only shitposted on the Internets about the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it."
Name
Email
Subject
Comment
Flag
File
Embed
Password (For file deletion.)

Matrix   IRC Chat   Mumble   Telegram   Discord


 No.471014

Just leaving my thoughts after reading interesting chapter on collaborations in modern supply chains.

Tho it's not like I expect anything from nazoid brainlets and dogmoid philosophycels that populate this board. Keep reading your gayzone, fags.
>>

 No.471015

File: 1689347547010.jpg ( 44.68 KB , 561x163 , intro.jpg )

Relevant planning angle for any type of market socialist (syndicalist, etc).
>>

 No.471016

File: 1689347706497.jpg ( 22.77 KB , 570x253 , pic domains.jpg )

depiction of what a collaboration in market conditions is - a coordination procedure between two local planning domains
>>

 No.471018

File: 1689347844305.jpg ( 88.99 KB , 565x285 , assymetry and coordination.jpg )

coordination is required because of the information asymmetry in the supply chain that prevents achieving global optimum (for a chain as a whole)
>>

 No.471019

>>471018
further note: use of various external price mechanisms to stimulate collaboration for a global optimum
>>

 No.471020

File: 1689348378651-0.jpg ( 113.98 KB , 563x634 , partnership.jpg )

File: 1689348378651-1.jpg ( 225.07 KB , 577x759 , collab types.jpg )

Complex multi-tier collaborations require a strong supply chain leader.
>>

 No.471021

File: 1689348637950-0.jpg ( 27.52 KB , 570x301 , pic tiers.jpg )

File: 1689348637950-1.jpg ( 81.79 KB , 569x279 , multi tier 1.jpg )

File: 1689348637950-2.jpg ( 11.84 KB , 561x59 , multi tier 2.jpg )

complex multi-tier collaboration requires information parallelism

SC leaders that fail to establish such parallelism fail in their collaboration attempt
>>

 No.471022

File: 1689348926248.jpg ( 74.72 KB , 568x483 , Intel case.jpg )

It looks like all of the complex multi-tier collaborations are of the supplier-driven type.

Intel case is especially noteworthy as it looks like Intel is one of the strongest SC leaders in the world.
>>

 No.471023

File: 1689349226615.jpg ( 105.61 KB , 568x562 , inventory collab.jpg )

In collab planning sales orders are generated ex-post after actual actual planning procedure automatically.
>>

 No.471024

>>471014
What's with the overly aggressive opening post ?
Do you want to derail your thread on purpose ?

>>471015
I'm feeling skeptical about that decentralized planning, with that negotiated information exchange.

From a socialist perspective your ultimate goal is an economic structure where every hour of labor-power is remunerated pretty much the same. Which means market-competition between workers stops entirely. If there is a need to pay extra incentives it's still possible to give extra bonus payments without creating wage differentials. The labor interest in eliminating competition between workers isn't the only reason for doing this. If you want to optimize the economy you have to reduce the amount of labor time it takes to produce goods or services, and if your accounting lacks consistent measurement of labor-time, it can't do that.

Those separate planning systems don't appear to be able to prevent wage-differentials.

A central planner that calculates all the prices for good and services based on labor-time, isn't really anything ominous. It does not diminish the power workers can have over their workplace, but it will make it virtually impossible to play workers against each other.
>>

 No.471026

File: 1689349607395.jpg ( 27.73 KB , 528x301 , pic demand collab.jpg )

information flows diagram of a demand planning in a two-tier collaboration

dunno how it would look in a multi-tier as the author doesn't provide real world examples
>>

 No.471028

>>471024
>What's with the overly aggressive opening post ?
what's wrong with being aggressive?

>I'm feeling skeptical about that decentralized planning, with that negotiated information exchange.

As you should. Collaborative planning that the author describes is a very limited version of planning.

>If you want to optimize the economy you have to reduce the amount of labor time it takes to produce goods or services, and if your accounting lacks consistent measurement of labor-time, it can't do that.

nobody in capitalism have a goal of optimizing "the economy", this "collaborative planning" is as far as it goes, at least currently

local enterprises can do local optimizations, usually of the in-kind type, they don't even need labor time measurements, they can deduce it from machine time

>A central planner that calculates all the prices for good and services based on labor-time, isn't really anything ominous.

depends on your political system and what you mean by a "central planner"
>>

 No.471029

File: 1689350598919.jpg ( 65.72 KB , 566x228 , capacity collab issues.jpg )

one aspect of uncertainty in the collab planning

the customer in such a capacity collaboration needs to be a very strong SC leader, as is usually the case with automobile manufacturers
>>

 No.471030

File: 1689350973318-0.jpg ( 122.15 KB , 567x450 , material and service 1.jpg )

File: 1689350973318-1.jpg ( 131.98 KB , 458x714 , material and service 2.jpg )

As services gain more and more prominent role we should see a wider adoption of planning technologies.

Listed industries: telecom, construction, medical.

Still requires a strong "service company" leader.
>>

 No.471031

File: 1689351798514-0.jpg ( 115.87 KB , 454x739 , negotiation 1.jpg )

File: 1689351798514-1.jpg ( 96.66 KB , 462x522 , negotiation 2.jpg )

negotiation process is iterative and uses a compensation mechanism on the customer side

exchange of information is limited - absolute costs and capacity utilization are considered too sensitive to share

strong SC leader like Intel required for sensitive information sharing?
>>

 No.471032

>>471031
Further note: the supply chain considered is only a two-tier chain, so expression "for the supply chain as a whole" is misleading?

tho looks like academfags ironed out the general case of two-tier collaborations..
>>

 No.471034

>>471031
Further note: negotiation process somewhat similar to Glushkov schema - iterative and machine assisted

differences:
1. obviously economy as a whole vs a two-tier chain
2. secrecy of information vs no secrecy (at least when it comes to government institutions)
3. negotiation between the end demand and the whole industry vs intra-chain negotiation
4. in-kind objective function (dis-aggregated vector of products) vs monetary objective function

another similarities to planning approach: a "rolling release" plan
>>

 No.471035

File: 1689353522078.jpg ( 66.92 KB , 458x310 , plan exchange.jpg )

>>471034
also

5. automatic information exchange vs manual exchange

described plan exchange mechanism looks pretty archaic tbh
>>

 No.471036

>>471028
>what's wrong with being aggressive?
It's a primitive emotion that helped cavemen to clobber the saber-tooth tiger that confused people for food.
Rhetorical aggressiveness is useless for having an intellectually productive discourse about economic theory.
For example i happen to hold the Grayzone investigative journalism publication in very high regards, you have nothing to gain by antagonizing me on that "front" if your goal is to talk about econ-theory. Ur disagreements on news-publishers need not be an impediment here.

>Collaborative planning that the author describes is a very limited version of planning.

Alright i shall take that into account.

>nobody in capitalism have a goal of optimizing "the economy", this "collaborative planning" is as far as it goes, at least currently

So it's about shoehorning at least some planning into capitalism, to dial down the chaos a little bit. That seems like an attempt at harm-reduction. I can respect that.

>local enterprises can do local optimizations, usually of the in-kind type, they don't even need labor time measurements, they can deduce it from machine time

Never heard of "machine time", care to explain ?

>depends on your political system and what you mean by a "central planner"

My assumption was you'd only get a central planner in a socialist system.

You could say that the neo-liberal system is centrally directed from large financial entities, but they do not appear to engage in much planning in the sense that they act towards future outcomes. It seems more like they react to the present. At least it looks that way from my vantage point. neoliberalism has a central reactor
>>

 No.471037

>>471036
>Rhetorical aggressiveness is useless for having an intellectually productive discourse about economic theory.
my "rhetorical aggressiveness" was provoked by you spamming brainlet Hudson vids and gayzone articles

>if your goal is to talk about econ-theory

my goal first and foremost was to sort out my own thoughts after reading the chapter

>So it's about shoehorning at least some planning into capitalism, to dial down the chaos a little bit.

No. It's about reducing the costs and maximizing profits.

>Never heard of "machine time", care to explain ?

literal machine time

humans in manufacturing are an appendage to the machine, where machine goes - they follow
so their labor time is tied to the machine time

>My assumption was you'd only get a central planner in a socialist system.

what's a "socialist system"?
>>

 No.471038

SO to answer my question in the OP

can Supply Chain (SC) be considered as a market agent? Only if it has a strong leader that has a major share in some big market

compared to the vertically integrated behemoths of the past like AT&T I guess this collaborative planning system can help to reap all the benefits of the vertical integration without many downsides, including excessive attention from the anti-trust regulators like FTC
>>

 No.471039

>>471037
You are talking about Micheal Hudson ? He seems like a knowledgeable economist. He's very critical of neoliberalism. His main distinctive theory points he makes are
industrial capitalism tendentially evolves towards socialism
financial capitalism tendentially evolves towards a type of economic relations reminiscent of feudalism
It seems to be born out by reality to a significant degree.
Tho i'm not sure how that relates to this type of planning you are talking about.

>No. It's about reducing the costs and maximizing profits.

So from the perspective of the workers it's about increasing the cost of using the productive forces to reproduce society.

>literal machine time

>humans in manufacturing are an appendage to the machine, where machine goes - they follow
>so their labor time is tied to the machine time.
Oh that's a very ideological way of looking at things.
A more realistic view is seeing machines as an appendage of human society, because machines can't reproduce them selves, but societies do reproduce machines. If a society decided to relocate itself, it would undoubtedly take it's machines with it, so machines aren't just constructed by humans they also follow humans. At least for the time being. Maybe in some future, humans decide to make machines their equal and design them with the ability for reproduction and autonomy.

In economic terms human labor is considered as the universal unit of labor, because human labor can make all the things in the economy including all the machines. You appear to be attempting to re-center that universality on machine capital. It's a bit reminiscent of the mid 20th century technocracy movement, that sought universality in energy.
>>

 No.471040

>>471039
>He seems like a knowledgeable economist.
nah
he's a typical class collaboration shill

>He's very critical of neoliberalism.

so? he's a shill for industrial capitalists (that don't exist anymore)

don't tell me you want a capitalism with a human face lol

>industrial capitalism tendentially evolves towards socialism

nonsense

historic industrial capitalism """tendentially""" evolved only into neoliberalism kek

>financial capitalism tendentially evolves towards a type of economic relations reminiscent of feudalism

absolute histmat illiteracy

feudalism in histmat theory is not when you pay for a subscription service

feudalism is an agrarian mode of production with a specific mechanism of surplus extraction

and by this metric this is still capitalism we are living in

>So from the perspective of the workers it's about increasing the cost of using the productive forces to reproduce society.

no, even from their perspective it's about reducing costs, because optimization reduces SNLT

>Oh that's a very ideological way of looking at things.

nah, what you describe is an ideological way of looking at the production process

I don't talk about abstract philosophycel shit here
I'm talking about concrete time

workers are de facto appendages in the manufacturing - they can't dictates the pace (and by extension time spent) - only machine dictates

that's just a fact, deal with it

>In economic terms human labor is considered as the universal unit of labor, because human labor can make all the things in the economy including all the machines.

So? how is this relevant to the FACT that concrete labor time in manufacturing is tied to the machine time?

>You appear to be attempting to re-center that universality on machine capital. It's a bit reminiscent of the mid 20th century technocracy movement, that sought universality in energy.

And you appear to be a brainlet who thinks I'm proposing some general economic theory of value based on machine time lol.
>>

 No.471041

File: 1689362615695.jpg ( 159.46 KB , 1600x1185 , Times_Most_Influental_Imag….jpg )

this thread is boring, fuck you faggots
>>

 No.471042

>>471041
Where are the chairs?
>>

 No.471852

File: 1691646722896.png ( 385.09 KB , 608x395 , ClipboardImage.png )

https://gowans.blog/2023/08/08/the-era-of-ultracheap-labor-is-under-threat/
The Era of Ultracheap Labor Is Under Threat
>Factories in China and Vietnam are struggling to attract young workers, which is bad news for Western businesses accustomed to offshoring jobs at subsistence-level wages.
>>

 No.471857

>>471016
Meaningless gibberish in which 'collaboration' is some gnostic black box
>>

 No.471858

File: 1691654816088.jpg ( 162.95 KB , 734x1280 , these homos are really sap….jpg )

>>471852
Same shoyze in CIS cuntrees: youngshitsteroids aint even considering working in factories, like, @ all. Even 2-4* of the usual wage payment doesn't help fucking porkoids in their desperate search for a new mass of profit-slaves.
Dog bless this coomin wageslave crisis will force the local capicucks or their substitute to finally start some kind of automatization of the industries.

Unique IPs: 7

[Return][Go to top] [Catalog] | [Home][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ overboard / sfw / alt / cytube] [ leftypol / b / WRK / hobby / tech / edu / ga / ent / 777 / posad / i / a / R9K / dead ] [ meta ]