I guess I'm just looking at it from a different point of view, but I do get what you are saying. I'm more interested in how they are different, besides the obvious differences in economies.
OOTB's Political Thread . ..
- Thread starter BillyL
- Start date
I guess I'm just looking at it from a different point of view, but I do get what you are saying. I'm more interested in how they are different, besides the obvious differences in economies.
Yeah, the wages themselves, not the amount of said wages. I'm sorry if I didn't make that clear. If they were getting paid a nickel/hour that would be the fruits of their labor. It would be rotten fruits, but fruits nonetheless. Now if you want to talk about the history of wage rates, we can do that too, but that's a separate discussion.
The “fruits of labor” generally means the product of labor. Labor produces goods and services. Those are the fruits of your labor. The compensation for that labor is a wage.
Even if I grant that wages are one of the fruits of labor, you can’t dismiss the fact that capitalists also are reaping the fruits of your labor in the form of the goods or services you produce. So you’re never actually getting ALL of the fruits of your labor. That’s my point.
The fruits of your labor is what you receive from your labor, whether it be milk, beef, vegetables, fruit, land, monies, etc... It doesn't have to be "fair value".
Your twisting definitions again. Most would agree that the fruits of labor are the products of labor. Not what you receive for your labor.
Those are just called products, dude. Products are what you produce. Now, if you produced them for yourself, they are the fruits of your labor. If you produced them for someone else, in exchange for a monetary sum, then that monetary sum is the fruit of your labor. You worked and you got something out of it. Just because it wasn't a product that your company produces doesn't mean that you were stiffed in the deal.
By your own definition then the products you produce are someone else’s fruits of your labor. Which brings us back to my point.
This discussion has run its course though. Nobody is benefiting from it at this point.
Yeah, the guy who owns the company uses his capital to produce items. Those items are the fruits of his labor. He pays his workers wages to produce those items for him. Those wages are the fruits of the workers' labor. Does he make more out of the deal? Sure. He also takes more risk as well.
Look at it this way as well. You make Blueray players for a company. Would you rather be paid in cash or Blueray players? Now, you may argue that farmers will produce food and everyone will share, but here's another problem. What if nobody has any real skin in the game? How do you motivate people? If I'm going to get paid the same whether I put together Blueray players or have the stress of running the entire company and working later hours, why would I choose the latter? Where does the motivation come from? The issue with this kind of economic policy and another issue in which Marx obviously overlooked is that there is no motivation. Why would you be in the army if you had easier options? Of course, this second paragraph doesn't have anything to do with the original discussion either. It's just an observation. Marx's plan might work in a smaller communal type setting, but it would be absolutely terrible in a larger setting.
Owning capital is not labor though. It’s the fruit of his investment. Marx would argue that it would be more efficient to eliminate the need for the profit.
If the blu Ray plays are liquid enough, and worth more than the wage, then I’ll take the blu Ray player. Marx would argue we should produce what we need and distribute to society as it is needed.
The question of motivation is a deeper question of psychology. Many people who have it made still work extremely hard even though there is little economic incentive to do so. So it’s not quite that simple.
Running a company is not labor? If you want to get into how investing money and charging usury for it isn't labor, we can do that. Of course, that issue was a big reason for anti-Semitism. Do we open that door?
It depends. Many industrial level capitalists are not directly running the company. They delegate, and sit back and get rich. If you own enough capital you don’t really have to do any actual work.
That's kind of true. You still have to do your homework in order to find proper investment opportunities and be involved in big decisions, but you may not be involved in day to day operations.
You're also taking all the risk, so I think it balances things out. Someone putting up their own capital is more likely to make good decisions than someone who is putting up the capital of someone else, but that's kind of a different discussion on the merits between Marxism and lasseiz-faire.
I heard that the Dems were blowing a gasket, but I don't have cable so I have no idea. It sounded entertaining if you like trainwrecks.
I just saw one clip, but he struggled today. Hope he endeared himself to Trump.
You saw one clip but you say he struggled......makes perfect sense how you would conclude that.
It was his opening. He pooed down his leg. I’m happy to view where he did well. Do you have a link for that?
Okay, I've watched about 20 minutes of this madness and I just can't stop laughing. They keep asking him about ongoing investigations and expect him to answer. The TDS was high in that room.
They weren't really asking. Well they were but they didn't really want a response. I laughed my ass off when he informed Nadler his 5 minutes were up.
It's just screamed of petty, childish behavior. You're right though, they didn't seem like they actually wanted an answer.
I believe some of us have known this for years, but I also think that there are tens of millions in the US that are too stupid to understand.
AOC is single handedly assuring Trump is president till 2024.
We need to strike down the 22nd Amendment so that we can make him ruler for life!
Hillary teases 2020 run? Clinton tells conference ‘It takes a woman to get the job done’
http://www.theamericanmirror.com/hi...ence-it-it-takes-a-woman-to-get-the-job-done/
http://www.theamericanmirror.com/hi...ence-it-it-takes-a-woman-to-get-the-job-done/
Apple and Google accused of helping 'enforce gender apartheid' by hosting Saudi government app that tracks women and stops them leaving the country
Oh, those left darlings...
https://www.thisisinsider.com/apple...-app-activists-say-fuel-discrimination-2019-2
Oh, those left darlings...
https://www.thisisinsider.com/apple...-app-activists-say-fuel-discrimination-2019-2
I think politicians should really think long and hard before getting a Twitter account, and using it frequently.
I happen to agree with you on this. Actually I would go further and say Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat and the like should all be taken down period. For the little good they do, the bad outweighs it by a TON.
Removed, Destroyed, Killed, Deleted, Wiped Out, FUBAR'd, and any other word or phrase one could come up with. Those social media platforms have caused more harm to society than any medium I can think of since the dawn of time.
They're like any form of communication. You can use them to do harm or to do good, as you define either of them.
So, now AOC has taken down the NGD resolution from her website, after being called out on the plan, and is now saying that it was something floated by the RNC. I guess the RNC put it up on her website? 
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...-case-of-aocs-scrubbed-green-new-deal-details
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...-case-of-aocs-scrubbed-green-new-deal-details
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...-case-of-aocs-scrubbed-green-new-deal-details
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...-case-of-aocs-scrubbed-green-new-deal-details
I can think of quite a long list of human creations that have done much worse, and were created with the sole purpose to destroy and malign.
Firearms, is one example. Or, we can go even more primitive... an ax, or a knife. You can use them to cut down a tree to build a house, or you can cut someone's throat. Either way, their presence made life easier and attended to to an apparent need, or they would have never been thought of or created.
People developing the ability to communicate with each other is just another tool. You can use it to help or harm. You can't push the needle back to before they were created, so you'd better learn how to control yourself and hope others follow your example.
I hope you find your time machine one day.
Similar threads
