Proponents of socialism argue that production for profit (i.e.,
capitalism) does not always satisfy the economic needs of people, especially the working-class, because capital only invests in production when it is profitable. This fails to satisfy demand, that is the needs of people who lack basic necessities but have insufficient purchasing power to acquire these needs in a manner that would be profitable for businesses. This results in a number of inefficiencies: unsold items are rarely given away to people who need but can’t afford them, unemployed workers are not utilized to produce such services, and resources are expended on occupations that serve no other purpose than to support the accumulation of profit instead of being utilized to provide useful goods and services. For example, the
United States housing bubble resulted in an
overproduction of housing units that could not be sold at a profit, despite there being sufficient demand and need for housing units. Production for use in some form was the historically dominant modality until the initial
primitive accumulation of capital. Economic planning is not synonymous with production for use. Planning is essential in modern globalised production both within enterprises and within states. Planning to maximize profitability (i.e., within industries and private corporations) or to improve the efficiency of capital accumulation in the capitalist macro-economy (i.e.
monetary policy,
fiscal policy and
industrial policy) does not change the fundamental criteria and need to generate a financial profit to be reinvested into the economy. A more recent critique of production for profit is that it fails spectacularly to address issues such as
externalities which the board and management of a for profit enterprise are often under a fiduciary responsibility to ignore if they harm or conflict with the shareholders'
profit motives.
Criticisms of production for profit Some socialists suggest a number of irrational outcomes occur from capitalism and the need to accumulate capital when capitalist economies reach a point in development whereby investment accumulates at a greater rate than growth of profitable investment opportunities. Many theories, such as the
Buddhist Economics, the
Appropriate technology, and the
Jevons Paradox, have demonstrated that the accumulation of capital due to maximization of profit, detaches Society from the process of producing social and economic value, leading to waste, inefficiency and underlying social issues.
Planned obsolescence is a strategy used by businesses to generate demand for the continual consumption required for capitalism to sustain itself. The negative effect planned obsolescence has to environment (mainly), is due to constantly increasing natural material extraction to produce the goods and services to satisfy a never ending added demand, linked with a non-caring disposal of end products. The creation of industries, projects and services comes about for no other purpose than generating profit, economic growth or maintaining employment. The drive to create such industries arises from the need to absorb the savings in the economy, and thus, to maintain the accumulation of capital. This can take the form of corporatization and commercialization of public services, i.e., transforming them into profit-generating industries to absorb investment, or the creation and expansion of sectors of the economy that do not produce any economic value by themselves because they deal only with exchange-related activities, sectors such as financial services. This can contribute to the formation of economic bubbles, crises and recessions. For socialists, the solution to these problems entails a reorientation of the economic system from production for profit and the need to accumulate capital to a system where production is adjusted to meet individual and social demands directly.
Contrasted with state capitalism As an objective criterion for socialism, production for use can be used to evaluate the socialistic content of the composition of former and existing economic systems. For example, an economic system that is dominated by nationalized firms organized around the production of profit, whether this profit is retained by the firm or paid to the government as a dividend payment, would be a
state capitalist economy. In such a system, the organizational structure of the firm remains similar to a private-sector firm; non-financial costs are externalized because profitability is the criterion for production, so that the majority of the economy remains essentially capitalist despite the formal title of public ownership. This has led many socialists to categorize the current
Chinese economic system as
party-state capitalism. The
economy of the Soviet Union was based upon capital accumulation for reinvestment and production for profit; the difference between it and Western capitalism was that the USSR achieved this through
nationalized industry and state-directed investment, with the eventual goal of building a socialist society based upon production for use and
self-management.
Vladimir Lenin described the USSR economy as "
state-monopoly capitalism" and did not consider it to be socialism. During the
1965 Liberman Reforms, the USSR re-introduced profitability as a criterion for industrial enterprises. Other views argue the USSR evolved into a non-capitalist and non-socialist system characterized by control and subordination of society by party and government officials who coordinated the economy; this can be called
bureaucratic collectivism. == Social production and peer-to-peer processes ==