"You can't reimburse the workers the full value of their labour" But this is exactly the point. * Assume that hamburger ingredients cost $2. * Assume that ham

"You can't reimburse the workers the full value of their labour" But this is exactly the point. * Assume that hamburger ingredients cost $2. * Assume that hamburgers sell for $5 each. ==> Net added value per hamburger is $3. * Assume that a worker can make 1 hamburger per hour manually. * Assume that the same worker can make 10 hamburgers per hour after the business owner has invested in a $300 hamburger machine. * Assume that the same worker can make 100 hamburgers per hour after the business owner has invested in a $1000 hamburger machine. ==> Is the "full value of the worker's labor" $3 / hour, $30 / hour, or $300 / hour? The worker's value add is not solely dependent on the worker and the products being created, but also on the capital invested by the business owner (and other factors). Just because the worker is not paid the entire economic value added being produced by the business does not mean s/he is being exploited.