• karakoram@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      That’s no strawman. You just refuse to see that there is no universal way to decide upon value that fits everyone’s notion of it. If both people in an exchange come away satisfied, did one exploit the other? How do you strictly define the excess value on each side of the transaction? Your idea of a profit-less society doesn’t consider how we’d pragmatically exchange our labor to achieve that.

        • karakoram@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          We aren’t mind readers. If you think we are wrong, explain why. You can call an attempt at defining your poor communication a strawman, but it only shields your ideas from the test of debate.