[QUOTE=ECrownofFire;37444230]What the fuck are you on?
In a free market, [b]every trade is beneficial for all people involved[/B]. In your example, the employee has the ability to provide labor, and the employer has the ability to provide money. The employer NEEDS labor. The employee NEEDS money. Both have a need, and both of their needs are fulfilled by the other person in a mutual agreement. Even if the employee is getting below market-value for their work, they are still gaining something, which means [B]they are still gaining benefit[/B].
Also, it's called going to work for someone else. There is not only one person that you can work for. If there is, that's called socialism (where the government owns the means of production and are therefore the only one hiring).[/QUOTE]
Using the same logic, a slave needs a slave owner, because the slave owner needs labor and the slave needs food and shelter. Don't fool yourself into believing that someone taking the product of your labor and giving a tiny percent back is equally beneficial. All the capitalist does in the entire process is provide starting capital. If anyone should be paid a wage, it should be the capitalist and not the worker. Both parties need something, but the fact of the matter is that the workers are paid proportionally less than the value of their service, while the capitalist is paid proportionally more than the value of their service. Whether or not it's initially beneficial to receive a wage is really not involved in the equation when you realize that the condition for the necessity of a minor wage is created through the continuation of the economic mode of production that benefits from it. You only need a wage because capitalism by its very working concentrates wealth into fewer and fewer hands, thereby creating a sufficient shortage of wealth in the working class, who then must subjugate themselves to the will of the capitalists in order to receive even the most minor of compensation for their services.
[QUOTE='[Seed Eater];37444419']Using the same logic, a slave needs a slave owner, because the slave owner needs labor and the slave needs food and shelter. Don't fool yourself into believing that someone taking the product of your labor and giving a tiny percent back is equally beneficial. All the capitalist does in the entire process is provide starting capital. If anyone should be paid a wage, it should be the capitalist and not the worker. Both parties need something, but the fact of the matter is that the workers are paid proportionally less than the value of their service, while the capitalist is paid proportionally more than the value of their service. Whether or not it's initially beneficial to receive a wage is really not involved in the equation when you realize that the condition for the necessity of a minor wage is created through the continuation of the economic mode of production that benefits from it. You only need a wage because capitalism by its very working concentrates wealth into fewer and fewer hands, thereby creating a sufficient shortage of wealth in the working class, who then must subjugate themselves to the will of the capitalists in order to receive even the most minor of compensation for their services.[/QUOTE]
Technically, yes, a slave would die without their owner... assuming they had nowhere else to go that was better for them. But life isn't like that and there are other employers out there that want workers.
And what about capitalism forces you to work for tiny amounts? If you don't like your pay, organize a fucking union or something.
[editline]28th August 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;37444279]what if every employer offers only low wages because labour is cheap?[/QUOTE]
Cheap in what context? Too cheap to survive on, too cheap to live a decent life, too cheap to have a comfortable life?
[QUOTE=ECrownofFire;37445221]Cheap in what context? Too cheap to survive on, too cheap to live a decent life, too cheap to have a comfortable life?[/QUOTE]
Cheap in that the employer can effectively blackmail somebody by basically saying "work for me at these low wages, and if you refuse, you will starve and some other person who is starving will take up the offer."
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
