3 ms·
Well my main complaint with how it's used in practice is that it carries a negative connotation, so if they successfully convince you that every corporation wit
by ikeboy 9y ago
Well my main complaint with how it's used in practice is that it carries a negative connotation, so if they successfully convince you that every corporation with employees is exploiting by definition then they have a moral argument against capitalism, an ought derived from an is.
- YeGoblynQueenne 9y agoIs there any way to frame "exploitation" that doesn't carry negative connotations? I don't really have anything to do with Marxists ("they") and I don't see how their attempts to convince of anything are relevant to our discussion.
- pbhjpbhj 9y agoI think Ikeboy may have actually nailed your objection: you appear to dislike touts, resellers, etc., because they increase ticket prices whilst appearing to add no value to the system. The same objection is levelled at the notion of employees who are restricted from accessing the financial gains that the value of their labour leads to, that the owner of a company - a rich person say who inherited their money - is possibly getting more money just because they are rich whilst the workers, when classed as employees, are doing all the work that creates the value represented in the financial profit that the owner walks away with. So, Ikeboy is saying you appear to object because the resellers are interjecting themselves and extracting the value without creating any value themselves, much as a corporations stock holders might. He appears to be saying "what's wrong with that", it is at the heart of capitalism after all.
- ikeboy 9y agoNot quite. I'm making the claim that they are adding value to the system, by correcting inefficiencies.