domingo, 11 de outubro de 2026

O capital no séc. XXI: rendas pra que te quero!


Linkedin 16-01-2026, por Nicolas Gold, Univ. of California, College of the Law, S Francisco
Imagem: LinkedIn / Nicolas Gold
A growing share of the modern economy, especially online, is shifting from value creation to rent extraction. This is often described as a consumer problem: subscriptions instead of ownership, rising fees, limited choice, and the sense that you are never finished paying.

That description is accurate, but incomplete. The deeper problem is macroeconomic. An economy increasingly organized around rents rather than productivity is structurally hostile to long-term growth.

For individuals, the shift is obvious. Software is rented, not bought. Media is licensed, not owned. Platforms charge for access to markets, audiences, and even visibility. Switching costs rise quietly. Prices increase incrementally. Exit becomes expensive.

This is not primarily because products are improving faster. It is because control over access has become the business model.

In economic terms, rents are returns above competitive levels. They arise not from creating new value, but from controlling scarce assets, choke points, or barriers to entry. In today’s economy, those assets are often digital: platforms, networks, data, standards, and ecosystems that others must pass through to participate.

Because rents are captured without proportional new output, they are redistributive by design. Income flows upward to asset owners and intermediaries rather than being shared through wages, competition, or lower prices.

At this point, it is useful to draw an uncomfortable comparison. Economically, rents and taxes share a basic similarity: both are compulsory payments that reduce disposable income and shape behavior. The difference is not how they are experienced, but how they are justified. Taxes earn legitimacy when they are predictable, rule-based, and used to finance public goods and long-term capacity. Rents offer no such justification. They are extracted privately, without accountability, reciprocity, or obligation to reinvest in collective welfare. That is precisely why erratic, toll-like charges feel so corrosive, and why societies that rightly scrutinize taxes should be at least as skeptical of private rent extraction, which often imposes comparable costs with far fewer benefits.

Over time, the consequences are predictable. Income concentration weakens demand, as a growing share of earnings accrues to those least likely to spend it. Investment shifts toward defending moats rather than improving productivity. Capital rewards lock-in, leverage, and control more than innovation. Competition erodes. Entry slows. Innovation still occurs, but its gains diffuse more slowly and are increasingly captured by gatekeepers.

The economy may continue to show profits and even headline growth. But that growth is increasingly the result of reallocating existing surplus rather than expanding it.

Digital markets amplify these dynamics. Network effects favor winner-take-most outcomes. Data advantages compound. Marginal costs fall, but prices remain sticky. Platforms begin to resemble private market governors, setting terms rather than competing on them.

This is why rent-based systems often appear stable and successful until they are not. They can sustain high profits and concentration for long periods while quietly eroding the foundations of broad-based growth. When adjustment finally comes, it does not arrive as a gentle correction. It arrives as slower growth, rising instability, and abrupt efforts to reassert control over systems that have already hardened. By then, the costs of unwinding them are far higher than the costs of preventing them.

The shift toward rents is therefore not just a consumer grievance. It is a system-level warning. An economy that prioritizes extraction over creation does not merely frustrate individuals. It undermines its own capacity to endure. 

[destaques Avebarna]

2026-09-13

sábado, 3 de outubro de 2026

CQD: o programa do imperialismo esclarecido

Substack 01-10-2026, por Paul Krugman
https://paulkrugman.substack.com/p/a-globalist-comeback

A Globalist Comeback? - Hints of a business break with MAGA

Paul Krugman
On September 28th Jamie Dimon, CEO of JPMorgan Chase, one of the most prominent, most successful financial figures in the United States, published an article in the Wall Street Journal titled, “The Hell with Trump, Let’s Go Back to Globalism.”

Okay, that’s a lie. That wasn’t what the article was titled, but it was, in effect, what it said. (..)

So what did Dimon call for? Well, he basically said, we need to repair the Western alliance. We need to bring the Western world, the advanced democracies, above all the United States and Europe, back together in part as a way to stand up against the threat of a rising China. And his proposal for how to do that was to negotiate a free trade agreement between the United States and the European Union. (..)

(..) free trade agreements can be a way of not just enhancing trade, which is important, but maybe not as important as economists would like to think. But they can also be a way of binding countries closer together. They can be a gesture of alliance. And Dimon obviously thinks that this is possible, or at least thinks that it might be possible — close enough to being something that would really be on the table, that it’s worth making a case for it, and that it’s worth positioning himself and his institution for a post-MAGA era. And as I said, Dimon is a smart guy with a very, very good political judgment.

So that op-ed was one of the most encouraging things I’ve seen in months. (..)
[Destaque Avebarna]

2026-10-03

quarta-feira, 30 de setembro de 2026

Cogitar não ofende


Bloomberg 25 09 2026
Imagem: The Rundown, edição Avebarna

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newsletters/2026-09-25/robot-installations-outpaced-human-hiring-at-us-factories-in-2025 

Faz alguns dias que eu me pergunto se a recente onda de nervosismo com os desenvolvimentos disso que está convencionado chamar-se Inteligência Artificial não provém da percepção, por parte dos proprietários dos direitos sobre seus aplicativos, de que a velocidade com que o trabalho é automatizado, na indústria como nos serviços, é a mesma com que o fundamento do valor é destruído e, com ele, também o da propriedade privada dos meios de produção.

PS: Será mera coincidência o fato de o desvario trumpista se expressar como políticas de tarifas aduaneiras e pilhagem de recursos naturais?


terça-feira, 29 de setembro de 2026

Chamem o alienista!



O que mais impressiona no ponto de vista dessa senhora é o total desinteresse, desprezo mesmo eu diria, pelos interesses gerais de sua própria classe, a dos capitalistas, cuja guarda é hoje exercida pelo presidente que ela prefere ver derrotado nas próximas eleições por sua suposta incapacidade de fazer o "ajuste das contas públicas".

Por "ajuste das contas públicas", o que Madame CEO tem em mente não é, digamos, a recuperação dos bilhões do Rio Previdência evaporados nas pilantragens de Claudio Castro e Daniel Vorcaro. Tampouco o fim das isenções fiscais para quem não precisa delas. Menos ainda a extinção dos supersalários do Judiciário e seus penduricalhos; das emendas legislativas; dos exércitos de apaniguados a que têm direito os picaretas que infestam o Congresso Nacional, as Assembleias estaduais e as Câmaras municipais - autênticos profissionais do rentável negócio da representação política que hoje constitui a essência das instituições parlamentares em nosso país. O que ela tem em mente é o desmanche... dos modestíssimos programas de governo destinados à manutenção da paz social indispensável à boa marcha dos negócios em geral!

Na verdade, o "ajuste das contas públicas" de Madame CEO é o corte de todas as despesas que não vão parar, por vias legais e ilegais, nas mãos de investidores em geral e consumidores de bens e serviços supérfluos e suntuários. 

Que diferença há, pergunto, entre o ponto de vista de Madame CEO, que espera ser governada por uma gangue de mafiosos na esperança de um tal "ajuste das contas públicas", e o do vice-presidente dos EUA, J. D. Vance, que declarou há poucos dias estar "fazendo a obra de Deus e se isso conduz ao fim do mundo, tudo bem"?    

Acho que essa gente precisa ser recolhida, o quanto antes, à Casa Verde. Chamem o Dr. Simão Bacamarte! 


domingo, 27 de setembro de 2026

O capital no séc. XXI: rendas pra que te quero!


https://www.facebook.com/reel/1763914081313650

A Inteligência Artificial é estúpida o bastante para admitir com franqueza os objetivos de seus proprietários, no caso desse instrutivo clip do senador estadunidense Bernie Sanders aquilo que podemos chamar de "surveillance marketing", aspecto mais geral do "surveillance pricing":

"Surveillance pricing is a data-driven strategy where companies track your online behavior, location, device, and browsing history to dynamically adjust prices. Instead of charging a flat rate, algorithms calculate the absolute maximum amount you are willing to pay at that exact moment. While businesses market this as "personalized discounts," regulatory bodies like the FTC warn it is frequently used as a tool for overpricing and economic discrimination." (Texto gerado por IA)

Significa que a competição econômica pela via da redução de preços resultante do aumento da produtividade do trabalho passa a ser arbitrada por um diferencial decisivo que é o seu exato oposto, vale dizer o aumento dos preços dos produtos e serviços acima do seu valor, derivado da manipulação das expectativas dos consumidores num cenário de concentração acelerada dos rendimentos. É o capitalismo parasitário das rendas de monopólio, das quais eu diria que só conhecemos com alguma profundidade as formas clássicas: riquezas naturais, imóveis urbanos bem localizados e patentes e seus congêneres autorais.

No entanto, a própria IA não é outra coisa que a a transformação do saber humano acumulado desde tempos imemoriais em propriedade dos capitalistas digitais; a enclosure do século XXI. A propriedade privada dos recursos da computação avançada, dita IA, é a fonte da forma definitiva das rendas de monopólio: a do conhecimento.


sábado, 26 de setembro de 2026

Avebarna segundo a IA

IA Google 24-09-2026
Não sei se mais me espanto com a inépcia da IA ou 
me congratulo com o fato de não lhe ser inteligível. 


sexta-feira, 25 de setembro de 2026

Avebarna Fridays for Future

 

The Guardian 21 09 2026 https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2026/sep/21/planetary-boundaries-breached-scientists-warn-climate-crisis 

The planetary life support systems relied upon by humans have deteriorated to their worst levels ever recorded amid ongoing pollution and habitat destruction, according to a key yet grim annual update by scientists.


Of the nine “planetary boundaries” that help determine whether life can flourish on Earth, seven are being breached at their highest ever levels of transgression, according to the latest planetary health check, a process that was established in 2009. (..)