I somehow didn’t connect that this post was for labor day the first time. I closed Lemmy and then it hit me.
I need caffeine.
That’s because the real Labor Day is May 1st. America changed it so it was less communist.
While I’m as pro Union as they come, I do not personally believe Labor Is Entitled To All It Creates, there’s a place for Entrepreneurial, Investment, Ownership and Management cut outs, but I believe these percentages should be strictly monitored and regulated. Thanks for coming to my TED talk.
If they actually do any labor in those tasks, then yes. Labour doesn’t necessarily mean the bottom level stuff. Management still takes work. Setting up new businesses takes work.
Investment and ownership intrinsically aren’t really labor though. Just owning the company doesn’t add anything of value to anyone, and investing is more like a trade agreement. Should be honored, but not necessarily treated the same. Because investment does help create, and the owners presumably have done work to get from nothing to something of value in the first place. Ideally, anyway. This isn’t necessarily true in reality. Plenty of owners inherited, and why should they be entitled just for being born lucky?
Many projects take a long time to become profitable. The workers would starve until then.
Because of that, they need to borrow wealth to be able to keep working on the project until it becomes profitable.
The concept of lending wealth is therefore necessary.
Noone is gonna accept the risk of lending out wealth unless they expect some gain, some profit.
Therefore the workers promise to not only repay the lent wealth but to also pay on top of that, perhaps a share of the project’s profit.
Hence the concept of profitable investment is necessary.
They don’t starve if food production is turned to the goal of feeding humans.
You think entirely too small.
Humans made Capitalism, and we can unmake it.
I believe these percentages should be strictly monitored and regulated
By labor.
Worker coops for everyone!
Management is either labor, or entirely parasitic.
Management is certainly a kind of labour and even a valuable one. A good manager can ensure the efficient operation of a whole organization, and a bad one can waste the efforts of whole teams and sink entire departments. No one is arguing managers and executives shouldn’t be justly compensated for their labour.
The problem comes when the compensation becomes detached from the labour. When a business produces a surplus and instead of that surplus going to the workers who produced the surplus, it goes to the investors.
Often these investors perhaps put some money into the business many years or even generations earlier, and yet are still entitled to receive cheques every quarter despite not having any role to play in producing that quarter’s surplus. How is that just?
Management should be considered a part of labor in this regard. Intellectual labor is labor and a situation in which management is beholden to those they lead but seen as part of it is where I’d consider ideal. It could be a situation like union stewards where they’re elected from the rank and file or a situation where they seek out someone with the specific skills they’re looking for in the same way they might hire a maintenance worker.
I do think there’s room for a limited reward for entrepreneurial and investment costs, but the idea that they have control in perpetuity is where I have issues. I think a situation where they’re automatically bought out for a reasonable return on investment given the risk is fair enough. Though I worry it will perpetuate the issue of wealth begetting wealth
Guinness stout one pint, 6 degrees centrigrade
zzzt!
Well that’s my work for the day!
Now it’s time to hunt some jerries in the battle of britain.
deleted by creator
This post sponsored by my transporter clone.
Do you own the machinery that makes what you’re helping to make? Most things aren’t made by your hands alone.
The machines are but worthless scrap without the human labor to operate it.
They cost more too. Point is the boss has made numerous monetary investments and you just sell your time to make them work.
Boss pays other people to build the machines.
Boss pays other people to gather resources.
Boss pays other people to run the machines.
Because The Boss is so hardworking he gets to decide who gets the money.
This is capitalism.
The boss spends the money and takes the risk. Your risk is screwing up and getting fired, not losing millions of dollars. Easy enough to get a different job if you don’t like it.
Risk is a cop out. The people taking these “risks” are, more often than not, very wealthy and their stake in any given venture is negligible. Bezos isnt putting his livelihood on the line to start a new business. Not to mention due diligence, insurance and the ever present corporate welfare machine (bailouts, tax cuts, etc.) reduce the risk to investors to the point that is effectively useless to consider it a risk at all.
And what about the risk labor takes every day? Commuting to work in their own vehicle introduces the risk of a life altering/ending accident. If they moved to get the job they’re in they’re risking a lot. The neighborhood they live in may not be safe, their home could be poorly maintained or pose a health risk, the school their child would be going to may not be good, their boss could fire them on a whim, they could become injured due to unsafe working conditions, the company health insurance could be terrible and not cover anything, and many more risks individuals take in order to eek out a meager existence. People.get fired for bullshit all the time. It’s not just screwing up. Hell, you can be an exemplary employee and still wind up on the street due to budget cuts, mergers, or the company just disappearing one day. The worker takes on much more risk than the business owner ever will.
Instead of defending the excess and privilege of the wealthy, why don’t you ask yourself what you’re getting from this arrangement? The odds are not in your favor, and the system is designed to make it incredibly difficult if not impossible for you to access the quality of life you think you can obtain in a capitalist system
See? Boss Man is putting in big risks. If he loses millions he might only still be a billionaire.
Me? Well if I lose my job I’ll just become homeless and destitute. I’m barely risking anything.
Thankfully I just remembered that Boss Man sold shares of his company to other folks so he doesn’t really have any risk at all! Phew! Sure am glad that’s working as designed.
Sorry. I forgot that you’re stuck at one job for life and unable to ever get another one without being homeless.
That’s the neat part! Because I don’t have a say in how the company is run I can be left completely destitute through no fault of my own!
Thankfully, if the company does go under Boss Man gets a fancy golden parachute. After all, it’s the company that lost all its money, not him! Praise Be to Limited Liability!
At the last few jobs I’ve had? Yeah. Cheap bastards made me buy my own fucking tools
Would that make you a contractor? You own the tools you use then you can go wherever else. If you aren’t a contractor then refuse and go elsewhere.
Nah, it’s not uncommon in the trades in the US to expect workers to bring their own tools. It’s bullshit, but unfortunately we’ve normalized lots of bullshit here.
And when every company in my industry requires me to own tools?
To quote a wise and angry man: “Fuck the G rides, I want the machines that are makin’ em”
