> Actually, it's the opposite. At the level of automation we've reached, labor is worth, per hour, way more than 100 years ago. The problem is just that this va

> Actually, it's the opposite. At the level of automation we've reached, labor is worth, per hour, way more than 100 years ago. The problem is just that this value is siphoned off by shareholders who do not have to If this were even slightly true, you could just go out and offer your labor on the street corner, and people would jump at the chance to buy it from you. Or you could "harvest" your labor and sell it retail to others trivially, and just loaf around half the year on the cool half million you earned the other half. You can't do these things, and few can. Your labor has no economic value whatsoever, nor does the labor of most other people. > The entire system is designed to drain as much v Designed by who? Why does everyone use the word design here? It sounds every bit as dumb to say "design" here as it would if we were talking about biology. The system evolved. No one person got to design, or parts of it, nor did a committee. If some billionaire or pope or warlord wanted to redesign it today, he couldn't. It's never been designable. No one would even know how to design it so that they could get the results they desired. > Being able to buy and sell shares is not problematic per se, but there should be rules in place that give all workers of a publicly traded company better access to owning parts of said company. How could it possibly be more accessible? If a hobo walked off the street smelling like poop and vodka, with a wad of money in his hands, right into the broker's office... do you think they'd turn down the money? Did you mean affordable?