- Capitalism and Alternatives -

Sorry---you just don't get it

Posted by: Barry Stoller on October 26, 1999 at 10:55:46:

In Reply to: Theft is theft is theft. posted by David on October 25, 1999 at 22:25:31:

: Theft is theft is theft. No matter how you cut it. The objective laws are based on man's rights. The primary being the right to his own life. Now, things that infringe on other people's rights, such as stealing from them or coercing them, is outlawed by the objective laws.

If you're so opposed to theft you should become a communist.

Surplus labor is extracted from working people only because the 'free contracts' they enter into with capitalists overwhelmingly favor capitalists.

Possessing a monopoly on the means of production forces the worker to submit to the 'free contract.' The worker can take it or leave it---but the penalty is starvation. Workers cannot walk away from the 'free contract.'

Profits are value produced by the worker that the worker does not receive.

The worker submits because the alternative is starvation.

If workers could access some of the means of production, they would never enter into 'free contracts' with capitalists, they would simply work for themselves.

: The numbers do not change. The interpretation, however, does. If college give out such hefty scholarships to people who cannot regularly afford to attend it changes the demographics of who attends colleges quite a bit. As a result of these scholarships you see middle to lower class children being able to go to better schools and consequently get better jobs. Social mobility, it is called. Not matter how you cut it, people are becoming better educated, are getting richer, and are enjoying luxuries undreamt of 20 or 30 years ago.

No matter how you cut it, only a quarter of American jobs require a level of skill above a high school public education. AND 'since the early 1970s, a rising share of university-educated workers have wound up with high school level jobs' (Business Week, 6 October 1997, p. 30). Social mobility has been curtailed since the 1970s (see the New York Times, 5 September 1999, sec. A, p. 14).

: Do you consider working 15 hours a day on a farm and having no luxuries preferable to working on an assembly line 8-10 hours a day and being upwards of $20+ per hour? Consequently allowing you to afford a decent living and some extra cash for your leisure time?

Upwards of $20 + jobs? Do you honestly believe everyone in America has a union job? The median wage for an individual in America is $17,897 a year---thatís $8.60 an hour (Statistical Abstract of the United States 1998, table 740, p. 469).

Besides, luxuries is not entirely the point. How people spend their working days is very important. And most people have low-skill monotonous jobs that they wouldn't dream of doing unless STARVATION compelled them to.

: Gosh, I really like to read Wired, I find it very witty and entertaining. Certainly it focuses a lot on wealth silicon valley entrepreneurs who have 10s of millions in stock options. I say good for them! I doubt they are wage enslaving anyone.

But they are! Who are assembling the computer parts? Who transports these products? Who stands behind a cash register selling these products?

No capitalist is an island.

: So long as my statements are built on the foundations of liberty and justice I will never cease to doubt their validity.

Spoken like Richard Nixon after a couple of hi-balls. You just don't get it---and I expect you never will.

Follow Ups:

The Debating Room Post a Followup