7 ms·

I just don't see how someone who is richer than me (even by a ridiculously huge margin) is more capable of exploiting me... I don't think I've ever been "exploi

I just don't see how someone who is richer than me (even by a ridiculously huge margin) is more capable of exploiting me... I don't think I've ever been "exploited" in my life and if I was, I'd expect due court process if it was criminal or civil in nature, or I'd no longer do business with or work for that person. HOW are rich people exploiting less-rich people? (me)

criddell 9y ago
By being able to influence legislators.
dv_dt 9y ago
Just one example is public beach access. All over the us, many wealthy people buy up large beachfront mansion properties (but not the public beach nearby). But somehow there ends up being lawsuits because construction (and sometimes private guards) will close off what was previously publically accessible beach areas. It's a symbolic version of what is happening for the wealthy in many other areas - in particular the political process where dollars speak in decisions stronger than voters.
state_less 9y ago
History has many examples, but outside of the illegal (see SV salary collusion case), there are many head games that are played. A common tactic is to make the employee feel insecure. For example, say that you're looking at efficiency improvements and considering going overseas to tamp down any chances people expect a raise. Get employees to feel guilty for not working harder, etc, etc...
batmanthehorse 9y ago
A business's profit is the excess value created by workers. Low-skill workers don't get the true value of their labor because they have no negotiating leverage in many cases (especially with the downturn in union strength in the US). It's not a symmetric negotiation, as it's easy for the big and powerful company to find other employees, because in many cases the workers' only alternative to being underpaid is being unemployed and homeless. Business owners exploit the basic human need for food and shelter to underpay low-skill workers.
- ancap 9y ago
  No one who is employed is paid "the true value of their labor". Every exchange, whether it's dollars for a good or dollars for labor, happens because of the subjective value the exchange provides to the exchangers. >Business owners exploit the basic human need for food and shelter to underpay low-skill workers. You could equally (and wrongly) say that workers exploit businesses basic need for labor. It's economic nonsense.
  - batmanthehorse 9y ago
    You're equating a business's "needs" with the human need to eat.
    - ancap 9y ago
      No, I'm equating one statement of economic nonsense with another statement of economic nonsense. It was a reductio ad absurdum. Unless there are severe external market constraints pushing down the demand of labor, an employer would never be able to "exploit the basic human need for food and shelter".
jpao79 9y ago
Here might be one current example. Are the first two articles related to the third one? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilbur_Ross#Investments https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilbur_Ross#Investments https://www.forbes.com/sites/michelatindera/2017/01/18/how-wilbur-ross-made-a-fortune-in-blue-collar-industries/#2805a7ff23ff https://www.forbes.com/sites/michelatindera/2017/01/18/how-w... https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/02/wilbur-ross-tariffs-are-nbd-but-campbells-says-cans-will-cost-more.html https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/02/wilbur-ross-tariffs-are-nbd-... If you are a holder of a Consumer Staples ETF (which holds Campbell Soup stock) in a retirement fund, is Wilbur Ross taking out of your pocket and putting it in his by using his personal connections with Trump and position as Commerce Secretary? Is it truly for American competitiveness or is it going to benefit ArcelorMittal and Wilbur Ross's connection with them?
Sohcahtoa82 9y ago
I would argue that they're not necessarily exploiting "non-rich" as much as they're exploiting the poor. The people in power do everything they can to keep wages down. Minimum wage doesn't keep up with inflation. Pensions went away in favor of the 401(k). Unions are losing their power. A manufacturing job used to buy you a house, car, and help you raise your 2.5 children. Now, it barely gets you an apartment and a bus pass. But the real exploitation is how the rich have convinced the poor that it's not their fault. "It's those damn, dirty Mexicans stealing jobs!" Or telling them "Hey, we'll give you a pay raise if you give us some tax relief!" or that if they want the house, they need to get a real job or something like that. Manufacturing jobs are non-skilled and don't deserve anything over minimum wage! Of course, it's all lies, but some people eat that shit up like candy. That's the exploitation. They're fucking the poor and successfully directing the blame somewhere else.
- dragonwriter 9y ago
  > A manufacturing job used to buy you a house, car, and help you raise your 2.5 children. There was maybe a very brief historical moment when that was true, but I don't think it was ever the case; industrial capitalism has always been strongly grounded in the economic insecurity of the working class.
- ancap 9y ago
  >The people in power do everything they can to keep wages down. Wages are set by the market through supply and demand
  - mjevans 9y ago
    So infect those poor people with memes that encourage having tons of kids so that there's a lot more poor people to compete for less and less jobs (as automation moves the means of production to family owned land / equity holdings)?
    - sokoloff 9y ago
      I'm not convinced that memes are the primary force driving the inverse relationship between wealth/income and birthrate.
marcosdumay 9y ago
By getting market monopolies (or oligopolies) and making you pay more for your things. (This one is quite straight forward, I don't think it needs examples.) By getting monopsonies (or oligopsonies) and making you receive less from the things you sell. (Like in combining labor prices, and non-poaching agreements.) By taking public property or outright coercing you into a less desirable outcome. (Like taking the tax you pay, or buying laws.) Way too many (too many to ignore) rich people got rich by doing one of the above. And even some that did get rich honestly end-up doing that once they have the power.

criddell 9y ago

By being able to influence legislators.

dv_dt 9y ago

Just one example is public beach access. All over the us, many wealthy people buy up large beachfront mansion properties (but not the public beach nearby). But somehow there ends up being lawsuits because construction (and sometimes private guards) will close off what was previously publically accessible beach areas. It's a symbolic version of what is happening for the wealthy in many other areas - in particular the political process where dollars speak in decisions stronger than voters.

state_less 9y ago

History has many examples, but outside of the illegal (see SV salary collusion case), there are many head games that are played. A common tactic is to make the employee feel insecure. For example, say that you're looking at efficiency improvements and considering going overseas to tamp down any chances people expect a raise. Get employees to feel guilty for not working harder, etc, etc...

batmanthehorse 9y ago

A business's profit is the excess value created by workers. Low-skill workers don't get the true value of their labor because they have no negotiating leverage in many cases (especially with the downturn in union strength in the US). It's not a symmetric negotiation, as it's easy for the big and powerful company to find other employees, because in many cases the workers' only alternative to being underpaid is being unemployed and homeless. Business owners exploit the basic human need for food and shelter to underpay low-skill workers.

ancap 9y ago
No one who is employed is paid "the true value of their labor". Every exchange, whether it's dollars for a good or dollars for labor, happens because of the subjective value the exchange provides to the exchangers. >Business owners exploit the basic human need for food and shelter to underpay low-skill workers. You could equally (and wrongly) say that workers exploit businesses basic need for labor. It's economic nonsense.
- batmanthehorse 9y ago
  You're equating a business's "needs" with the human need to eat.
  - ancap 9y ago
    No, I'm equating one statement of economic nonsense with another statement of economic nonsense. It was a reductio ad absurdum. Unless there are severe external market constraints pushing down the demand of labor, an employer would never be able to "exploit the basic human need for food and shelter".

jpao79 9y ago

Here might be one current example. Are the first two articles related to the third one? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilbur_Ross#Investments https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilbur_Ross#Investments https://www.forbes.com/sites/michelatindera/2017/01/18/how-wilbur-ross-made-a-fortune-in-blue-collar-industries/#2805a7ff23ff https://www.forbes.com/sites/michelatindera/2017/01/18/how-w... https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/02/wilbur-ross-tariffs-are-nbd-but-campbells-says-cans-will-cost-more.html https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/02/wilbur-ross-tariffs-are-nbd-... If you are a holder of a Consumer Staples ETF (which holds Campbell Soup stock) in a retirement fund, is Wilbur Ross taking out of your pocket and putting it in his by using his personal connections with Trump and position as Commerce Secretary? Is it truly for American competitiveness or is it going to benefit ArcelorMittal and Wilbur Ross's connection with them?

Sohcahtoa82 9y ago

I would argue that they're not necessarily exploiting "non-rich" as much as they're exploiting the poor. The people in power do everything they can to keep wages down. Minimum wage doesn't keep up with inflation. Pensions went away in favor of the 401(k). Unions are losing their power. A manufacturing job used to buy you a house, car, and help you raise your 2.5 children. Now, it barely gets you an apartment and a bus pass. But the real exploitation is how the rich have convinced the poor that it's not their fault. "It's those damn, dirty Mexicans stealing jobs!" Or telling them "Hey, we'll give you a pay raise if you give us some tax relief!" or that if they want the house, they need to get a real job or something like that. Manufacturing jobs are non-skilled and don't deserve anything over minimum wage! Of course, it's all lies, but some people eat that shit up like candy. That's the exploitation. They're fucking the poor and successfully directing the blame somewhere else.

dragonwriter 9y ago
> A manufacturing job used to buy you a house, car, and help you raise your 2.5 children. There was maybe a very brief historical moment when that was true, but I don't think it was ever the case; industrial capitalism has always been strongly grounded in the economic insecurity of the working class.
ancap 9y ago
>The people in power do everything they can to keep wages down. Wages are set by the market through supply and demand
- mjevans 9y ago
  So infect those poor people with memes that encourage having tons of kids so that there's a lot more poor people to compete for less and less jobs (as automation moves the means of production to family owned land / equity holdings)?
  - sokoloff 9y ago
    I'm not convinced that memes are the primary force driving the inverse relationship between wealth/income and birthrate.

marcosdumay 9y ago

By getting market monopolies (or oligopolies) and making you pay more for your things. (This one is quite straight forward, I don't think it needs examples.) By getting monopsonies (or oligopsonies) and making you receive less from the things you sell. (Like in combining labor prices, and non-poaching agreements.) By taking public property or outright coercing you into a less desirable outcome. (Like taking the tax you pay, or buying laws.) Way too many (too many to ignore) rich people got rich by doing one of the above. And even some that did get rich honestly end-up doing that once they have the power.