2 ms·
You're just reiterating that capitalism is capitalism. Capital demands a higher possible gain than the labour that is actually creating value to play the game,
by piva00 2y ago
You're just reiterating that capitalism is capitalism. Capital demands a higher possible gain than the labour that is actually creating value to play the game, simply because it is harder to accumulate capital than providing labour, if you have enough capital you can mitigate risks, so why exactly should that risk be compensated more than the actual creation of value provided by labour?
Without capital in this system labour can still provide value, it's harder, and slower but a group of people getting together and creating something is still possible (albeit much slower). Without labour capital has almost no value.
- WalterBright 2y agoWithout capital labor has no value.
- piva00 2y agoHow so? One can dig a hole with their bare hands and find a water source. If one create some rudimentary tools then the process is faster. If another one sculpts the dug clay and fashion rudimentary sun-dried clay vases you got a way to temporary store that water. All of that has value and the only "capital" needed were the basic resources of some wood, food, and water, if you stretch the meaning of capital. Capital cannot, ever, create value by itself, it has to come from labour. Capital can only help the process to be faster. Even in a potential distant future where everything is made by machines, labour is required, just not human labour. There's absolute no value from capital without labour. Please, prove me wrong.
- WalterBright 2y agoTry starting a lemonade stand without capital. QED
- piva00 2y agoI gave you a clear example of a process which can be started without capital. Don't be an asshole, every single time I attempted to have a discussion on this topic with you you've been a dismissive asshole, instead of some of your more usual thoughtful comments you retract into this dogmatic stupidity. Again: what can capital do without labour?