The capitalist is able to procure computers from other workers because they control capital. They then take part of the proceeds of any additional labor attache

The capitalist is able to procure computers from other workers because they control capital. They then take part of the proceeds of any additional labor attached to it. This is the extraction of surplus value that is being discussed. The workers do not control capital or the means of production and the undemocratic processes of private capitalism means that they will be paid only as much as it takes for them to survive and reproduce their living status without the intervention of the state. A key socialist idea is to give the workers the control of the means of production and this theft would cease. The idea is that workers as a whole should democratically decide what should be done with the proceeds as they were instrumental in producing them. Yes, people should be paid to do all kinds of labor. It's not obvious that they should be paid a fraction of all other people's labor in the organization (stocks). As for bonds, I haven't seen an analysis before, but I'll take a stab. Bonds are the idea that I'll lend you some money and you'll pay me back with interest. The idea inherent in it is that I have no interest in what you're doing other than making some money out of the deal. Person to person, other considerations are pertinent, but at a repeatable institutional level, that's what it comes down to (other than enforceable legality and public pressure). Interest payments in general are also exponential rather than a fixed risk premium, and so represent a particularly extractive way of doing business (though bond payments are closer to fixed payments though they are calculated as interest). Credit cards for instance, exhibit this phenomenon more intensively as there is no ceiling on interest.