4 ms·

> Everybody is an entrepreneur. If you have nothing, you sell your body and work hours. But that's just a contract like every other contract. This is a fake wo

> Everybody is an entrepreneur. If you have nothing, you sell your body and work hours. But that's just a contract like every other contract. This is a fake world. In the real world there is history, capital and labor, and politics which is an expression of the unavoidable, built-in antagonism between the two. We don't all own an equal share of the means of production and just sit around issuing contracts to each other all day. Do you understand that the econ 101 libertarian world of homo economicus rational agents is fake and we live instead in the real world with its institutions and conflicts?

antisoeu 6y ago
Capital and labor is a fake distinction. Your body/capability to work is capital.
- minimuffins 6y ago
  Your body/capability to work is labor. Property that you can use to produce value beyond itself through workers' labor is capital.
  - antisoeu 6y ago
    Again, it is a fake distinction. Suppose you had a robot. Would that robot be labor or capital? Assume the robot has the same capability for work as you. At the end of the day it is a machine, so "capital". Likewise you own your body, it is your capital.
    - minimuffins 6y ago
      Great news! I can't wait to hire workers to start using my body to produce valuable commodities which I can then sell for a profit!
      - covid21 6y ago
        Well you could become an actor, and film makers could use your body to make movies they sell for profits. Or let's say photo model - then they could really move your body around and position it in poses to take photographs. Really, I think your distinction of "capital" and "labor" is fake and completely useless. It's definitely useless, and unclear why you insist on it.
        minimuffins 6y ago
        > Well you could become an actor, and film makers could use your body to make movies they sell for profits. Then I would be a laborer. The film company would be using my labor as well as the director's, in conjunction with all the capital they own (cameras, sets...) to generate a profit. > they could really move your body around and position it in poses to take photographs. Labor. > I think your distinction of "capital" and "labor" is fake and completely useless Ok. It's not "mine" though, these are centuries old analytical concepts. > unclear why you insist on it. I insist on it because it's a sensible and already established way to talk about this stuff. You guys are the ones making the weird nominal excursion by asserting that labor and capital are identical because you read in a Tim Ferris startup manual that "every man is his own capitalist!" or something. You don't have to be a radical to just use these terms in their original way. I promise you that pro-capitalist theorists also talk about labor and capital as distinct.
        covid21 6y ago
        You have yet to make any useful argument that derives from your definitions. And I was only providing the examples you demanded, of other workers using your body. "It's not "mine" though, these are centuries old analytical concepts." Yeah but Marxism has not taken over the world. Lots of concepts are centuries old but have still not proven correct or useful.

antisoeu 6y ago

Capital and labor is a fake distinction. Your body/capability to work is capital.

minimuffins 6y ago
Your body/capability to work is labor. Property that you can use to produce value beyond itself through workers' labor is capital.
- antisoeu 6y ago
  Again, it is a fake distinction. Suppose you had a robot. Would that robot be labor or capital? Assume the robot has the same capability for work as you. At the end of the day it is a machine, so "capital". Likewise you own your body, it is your capital.
  - minimuffins 6y ago
    Great news! I can't wait to hire workers to start using my body to produce valuable commodities which I can then sell for a profit!
    - covid21 6y ago
      Well you could become an actor, and film makers could use your body to make movies they sell for profits. Or let's say photo model - then they could really move your body around and position it in poses to take photographs. Really, I think your distinction of "capital" and "labor" is fake and completely useless. It's definitely useless, and unclear why you insist on it.
      - minimuffins 6y ago
        > Well you could become an actor, and film makers could use your body to make movies they sell for profits. Then I would be a laborer. The film company would be using my labor as well as the director's, in conjunction with all the capital they own (cameras, sets...) to generate a profit. > they could really move your body around and position it in poses to take photographs. Labor. > I think your distinction of "capital" and "labor" is fake and completely useless Ok. It's not "mine" though, these are centuries old analytical concepts. > unclear why you insist on it. I insist on it because it's a sensible and already established way to talk about this stuff. You guys are the ones making the weird nominal excursion by asserting that labor and capital are identical because you read in a Tim Ferris startup manual that "every man is his own capitalist!" or something. You don't have to be a radical to just use these terms in their original way. I promise you that pro-capitalist theorists also talk about labor and capital as distinct.
        covid21 6y ago
        You have yet to make any useful argument that derives from your definitions. And I was only providing the examples you demanded, of other workers using your body. "It's not "mine" though, these are centuries old analytical concepts." Yeah but Marxism has not taken over the world. Lots of concepts are centuries old but have still not proven correct or useful.