 |
|
DuncanK
|
 |
Evil Empire
Dec 2002 time: 21:25
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Velociryx
ARGH! No, No, No!
IF you want equality of outcomes, then you DOOM the society you are trying to build!
You doom it because I can do NOTHING....zip, zero, zilch, nada, and get the SAME outcome as a person who works hard for twenty hours a day.
THAT is a far more insidious form of "exploitation" than anything you will ever see in a capitalist society, and it *exactly* what your plan will bring about!
-=Vel=- |
Extremely elitist. You know the thing about elitism is that its impossible to determine who is better than everyone else. In fact, people aren't so diferent. Everyone has their faults, but they deserve equal treatment regardless.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
DuncanK
|
 |
Evil Empire
Dec 2002 time: 21:25
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Velociryx
That, I contend, is incorrect. If I am assuming five hundred times the risk you are (say, I'm the one with the twenty million dollar loan hanging over my head to pay for the factory we're working together in), then my pay should reflect that.
Equal opportunity in this instance means that if you want the big bucks, take the big risks. If and when you do, you'll see an equal payoff.
If you are unwilling to assume those risks, then you cannot expect the same level of payoff.
-=Vel=- |
Vel,
A person without savings is at serious risk everyday. Sure you're taking a risk, but if you lose you just end up like the rest of us. Actually, you're still better off as I'm sure that you have made some nice connections during your venture.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Velociryx
|
 |
of Candle'Bre
Apr 1999 time: 05:25
|
|
It is absolutely no different, and your reasoning that it is simply does not fly.
If you and I make an investment together (per the example above), and I contribute more, and thus, get a larger percentage of the return back, that is the *exact same principle* at work in the case of the factory owner.
He made an investment (his money) into the big, expensive machine. You likewise make an investment (your time) into coming there to work. The factory owner's investment is the larger of the two, and he gets the bigger share of the reward.
Same principle applied to both situations.
So if I'm not exploiting you, then neither is the factory owner.
Unless you disagree that time = money, in which case, study economics....
-=Vel=-
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Velociryx
|
 |
of Candle'Bre
Apr 1999 time: 05:25
|
|
Duncan - I contend you are incorrect. There is no difference between the investment example and the shoe factory example. None whatsoever. The exact same mechanmism that makes our splitting of the hypothetical investment proceeds non-exploitive, *also* makes the shoe factory owner's "profiting froml your labor" non-exploitive.
Before you were even in the picture, the shoe factory owner put his neck on the proverbial chopping block, and invested his money + money in his name (bank loans and such) to BUILD the shoe factory.
Once built, you agree to come to work in the factory to make shoes (note that you did not help build the factory, nor pay for the machine, nor anything else in the building) - Your contribution to this investment then, is your time spent making shoes.
This investment contribution is less than the factory owner's, so, when it comes time to divvy up the profits, guess who gets the larger share?
If it makes you "feel better" about it, then just think of it as yep....you own the shoes you make, but because you don't own the machine you made them on, you have to sell them immediately to the guy who owns the machine. This process is automated in the form of your paycheck.
-=Vel=-
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:25. Apolyton Time is 00:25. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|