 |
|
Kontiki
|
|
Canada
Aug 2001
time: 00:17
|
|
Spiffor:
We're going around in circles here. You think it's fine to reap rewards simply for owning a company as long as you are the owner, but not if someone else is. I'm not sure why you don't see it, but I don't know how to explain it any clearer than I have. All I can say again is that I think you're using profit and value interchangibly and that's causing problems. It's inconsistent to agree with Flubber's tractor proposition and say that someone who only contributes capital should receive no compensation from the output.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Flubber
|
|
With a view of the Rockies
Aug 2000
time: 22:17
|
|
yes and capitalists will temporarily pay far more than market rate when faced with a necessity ( a deadline where they pay double or triple time or even more outrageous rates.
lets make a deal. In all your scenarios this won't be the only available job for a starving worker with eight hungry kids . .. . and in my scenarios the employer won't be one of three bidding on the only available electrician for a thousand miles that can do a repair on any one of the three plants where each costs $100,000 an hour while its off-line.
deal ??
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Spiffor
|
 |
CPA - Evil Clone brigade
Nov 2001
time: 06:17
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kontiki
We're going around in circles here. You think it's fine to reap rewards simply for owning a company as long as you are the owner, but not if someone else is. I'm not sure why you don't see it, but I don't know how to explain it any clearer than I have. |
In that case, I am not the "owner" of the company, because in my system, "ownership" of a company would have no more meaning as "ownership" of a human being, or of a country, has today.
In that case, along with all the other employees of the company, I decide the fate of that year's profit. Should iwe increase wages with them, should we give an annual bonus, or should we keep it for later investment? That's the question asked in today's general assemblies of shareholders. It's the same questions that are asked in a Spifforist company, where the political weight (and the associated bonus) of an individual doesn't depend on how much capital he invested.
quote:
All I can say again is that I think you're using profit and value interchangibly and that's causing problems. |
I don't. The only reason why I thought the value increased in your example is because I misread it at first. What increases is the added value (i.e. value of the good - price of the productive process discounting wages), because the price of the productive process decreases. The profit also increases (added value - wages) at least until the wages are re-assessed. What does the company do with that profit? This question is answeed in the general assembly of the employees.
quote:
It's inconsistent to agree with Flubber's tractor proposition and say that someone who only contributes capital should receive no compensation from the output. |
I agreed with Flubber's proposition because everybody had a better situation out of it. In Cap / Com debates, it is very important to keep in mind both creating and distributing value.
Since Flubber's example resulted in a creation of value that great that it outweighted exploitation, it was acceptable. I don't consider it as great virtuous morals, but the positive outcome outweights the fact that the worker doesn't benefit from the entirety of the value he now produces.
However, when the distribution tilted too much toward the capitalists (in my continuation of the example), it stopped being morally acceptable, because the worker was strongly stripped of his work's worth.
It may be inconsistent, but when you're presented with an extreme case, it's not necessarily a good idea to be 100% consistent. See Floyd, and you'll see what I mean 
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Kidicious
|
 |
Diety of Kidiverse
Mar 2003
time: 21:17
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Arrian
I'm sorry you are sick, Kid. I hope you feel better.
However, what Flubber and I are after isn't some meaningless detail. I think it's crucial to the discussion.
If, under communism, people are to be properly compensated for their labor, how do you determine the value of that labor? Who decides, and how? That's pretty damned important.
-Arrian |
I'm trying to tell you that. At the moment I can't think of a better way, but sometimes when we get into these philosophical debates we forget about reality, and reality is that a widget is worth a widget, no more, no less.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Kuciwalker
|
 |
of Schmooism
Feb 2001
time: 00:17
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kidicious
Would you ever work for someone for what you considered less that what your work was worth so that you could make ends meet, if even just temporarily? |
Worth to whom?
If it's less than it's worth to the employer, than yes, almost always, unless I get EXACTLY the maximum the employer is willing to pay.
If it's less than it's worth to me, obviously not, because I'd be better off not trading my work for the money than doing so!
If it's less than it's worth to a lot of people, but for some reason it's not possible to sell it to those people, then, well, yeah, though I'd try and find a better deal.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Kuciwalker
|
|
of Schmooism
Feb 2001
time: 00:17
|
|
Who's talking about the "social" value of my labor?
Let's look at my post again:
quote:
Worth to whom?
If it's less than it's worth to the employer, than yes, almost always, unless I get EXACTLY the maximum the employer is willing to pay.
If it's less than it's worth to me, obviously not, because I'd be better off not trading my work for the money than doing so!
If it's less than it's worth to a lot of people, but for some reason it's not possible to sell it to those people, then, well, yeah, though I'd try and find a better deal. |
Value is relative. Frankly, I don't care how much people on average value my labor, except inasmuch as it influences how much I can get for it. The value of my labor to me is OBVIOUSLY based on my conditions.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:17.
Apolyton Time is 00:17. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
16-12-2004 01:58
Have you lost your mind?
Don't make me give unnecessary details. I've got some kind of virus right now.
|
|