Re: What do workers compete for?

Robert J. Kolker wrote:

> 
> 
> The Trucker wrote:
> 
>>>
>>>TANSTAAFL.
>> 
>> 
>> You are right, of course.
> 
> Not me. Robert Heinlein.
> 
> Bob Kolker


Nice job of editing out the remarks.  Very typical of a Repugnican.
Just throw out the stuff that does not agree with your religious
views and present what is left as "data".  I have taken the liberty
of restoring the actual response:

--------------------------------------------

You are right, of course.  The "owner" of the tree must also extract
enough nuts from the deal to pay the enforcer of the owner****p privilege
a "sweetener".  But most of the nuts needed to protect the owner****p
privilege are collected directly from the nut harvester who must now
pay the "owner" even more for the nut harvest due to the tax on
wages.  It seems that the enforcer and the owner must both "work"
for their position, but the work they do is minimal when we consider
the amount of nuts they get out of the deal.

And being good Repugnicans they will speak of "providing jobs" to
those who harvest nuts.

---------------------------------------------------

We see that the Repugnicans must do _something_ to be able to steal
the fruits of labor (i.e. they must prance around being "moral" and
convincing the dimwitted Repugnican rank that without the LEADER****P
the rank and file will be eaten by the bogeyman) so the
lunch is not _FREE_.  It IS, however, very, very cheap.

-- 
http://GreaterVoice.org
(a work in progress)