3 ms·
What you've basically said is that labor isnt the only input to production; there are other inputs required as well. So if labor is just one of many inputs, it
by missedthecue 5y ago
What you've basically said is that labor isnt the only input to production; there are other inputs required as well.
So if labor is just one of many inputs, it seems wrong to attribute all profit to labor as if it played the only part.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- ruined 5y agowell, within the theory, all of those other inputs are also labor. "fixed" capital like skills, software, machines, and facilities are all produced with labor input. liquid capital like funds, raw/processed materials, and commodities are produced, extracted, refined, processed and/or transported by labor. executive decisions, management and organization are labor. land itself is just about the only thing that is arguably not ultimately labor, but it seems that through the capitalist lens, land is only valuable due to location (proximity to labor?) or resources gained by application of labor to the land. you could make some arguments about conservation, but those tend to be either moral arguments about externalities which by definition are not systematically considered by capitalism, or arguments about natural environments as a resource, in which maintenance and access management become the value-creating labor.