by forbisgaryg@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mar 30, 2008 at 03:12 PM
On Mar 30, 2:12=A0pm, ar...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Karen Gordon) wrote:
> > forbisga...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> >> I disagree about Capitalist begin greed-driven.
> >> I don't see getting a return on capital as greed-driven.
> >> If some laborer wants to use my capital without compensating
> >> me then that laborer is greedy. =A0I've worked hard for what
> >> I have and I've done my best to make sure my transactions
> >> are fair for all parties (to my own =A0detriment). =A0Damn the
> >> greedy people who see the results of my hard work and call
> >> me greedy.
>
> (K): Working hard and getting compensated for the work IS NOT the
> definition of 'capitalism'.
You're confused. I never said it was. Capitalism is trading the
use of capital for a ****tion of the production from the labor using
it is capitalism.
>=A0That's called LABOUR and its greatest
> proponents are average working people and labour unions.
When some produces capital on his or her own behalf then the person
shouldn't have to give it up without compensation. Labor is involved
in the production of capital then capital is utilized to increase
the productivity of future labor. My life's blood is in my capital
and if it is taken from me by greedy people who don't want to produce
their own but want the benefit of mine then they steal my labor
and the ****tion of my life I spent producing my capital.
> Would you please give us all an example of a "laborer wanting to use
your
> capital without compensating YOU".
I already did. Jerry thinks he should be able to use my hammer
without compensating me. To him it's just a hammer but to me it
is the product of my labor. Suppose it wasn't a hammer but a factory?
Would that be different? If I produce a factory am I not its owner?
What is a factory but a building with a collection hammers and saws
and such?
The issue of fairness goes both ways between labor and capital.
There's greedy people everywhere.
> It's almost always the other way around..... capitalists/employers
> exploiting the labourer and not wanting to compensate him/her with
decent
> wages.
As I've said many times wealth flows towards the least needy. The
reason is quite simple. The least needy person in a trade can wait
for better terms where the most needy settles earlier. Most laborers
live from paycheck to paycheck. Some people invest in risky capital
but those with more steady hands look for good ROI where increased
risk is offset by increased potential return (and actual return when
it pays off.)
While I believe big labor is needed to offset big capital
it seems like big labor favors the greedy as well. Compensation
is often structured around seniority rather than productivity.
The more productive subsidize the less productive.
