I drink your milkshake! a metaphor for capitalism

[brett636]

so why did the employer hire me in the first place if i am only producing $10/hr of value, and am only being paid $10/hr? are you saying employers dont profit off of their employees?

The employer is supposed to profit from employees. That is why the employer is in business in the first place. No profit motive means no business, no business means no jobs. If an employer offers a job at $10/hr. and gets 10 candidates for said job then the market has spoken and the rate is fair. If the employer offers a job at $10/hr. and gets few or no candidates responding, and or poorly qualified candidates then the market has stated the wage is too low. If you were to open a doctors office today and needed to hire a doctor to work for you and wanted to pay said doctor $10/hr. you wouldn't get so much as a phone call from a qualified doctor today. Same goes for any skilled profession be it engineer, accountant, or even a truck driver. Now if the job that is advertised happened to be for a cashier at a McDonalds you would have plenty of choices for employees because there are plenty of McDonald's cashiers that aren't making even $10/hr. The cashier is a low skilled job and therefore commands a lesser rate of pay. Its the employers business whether they will pay more than that, and nobody elses because its the employer taking on the risk of the business and the risk of paying higher than market rates.

What market share does Fedex Ground have to have at half the UPS compensation for UPS Teamsters to accept that the market values them far lower than they are compensated? Capitalism is a monster and "market valuation" rarely considers the human element. It is strictly based on cost management.

The human element is the job itself. The chance to earn a living and support themselves and their families is free market capitalism working its magic. Even though not in all cases that individual will go into bigger and better things it does show initiative which counts a lot more than people realize in this world.

 

[bbsam]

Does that then make the union an unnatural detriment to capitalism?

 

[ImWaitingForTheDay]

Does that then make the union an unnatural detriment to capitalism?

You know he won't answer that, its the got mine so screw you route..If these so called union workers ever worked for fedwrecks excuse, or ground they would be on their collective knees begging for the union....Ask me how I know,cause I've done both..Trust me I busted my butt as a teamster,but fedwrecks home D,towards the end it was like freight Junior-- heavy crap ,more stops and less pay. Some of the most dangerous trucks to work out of.Seen may a man go down with bad knees,back,etc,etc...I could go one about the benefit of the union,but to many here it would,and will fall on deaf ears....

 

[rickyb]

Why compare America & China , but not Canada ?

could have easily swapped america with canada. canada has marginally better labor standards than the states. china is the extreme of capitalism where it borders on wage slavery conditions so thats why i used it as an example

 

[moreluck]

could have easily swapped america with canada. canada has marginally better labor standards than the states. china is the extreme of capitalism where it borders on wage slavery conditions so thats why i used it as an example

Trolling Merit Badge

 

[sailfish]

RickyB's milkshake brings all the boys to the yard.

 

[pickup]

no no. like if a slave holder does the work to buy slaves and tells them what to do on a plantation, it doesnt matter because society deems slavery unacceptable.

im saying employers dictating almost everything to workers should be just as unacceptable, and workers should own and certainly democratically control the jobs they work in by voting on things, including voting in managers if the voting becomes too bureacratic.

 

[rickyb]

The employer is supposed to profit from employees. That is why the employer is in business in the first place. No profit motive means no business, no business means no jobs. If an employer offers a job at $10/hr. and gets 10 candidates for said job then the market has spoken and the rate is fair. If the employer offers a job at $10/hr. and gets few or no candidates responding, and or poorly qualified candidates then the market has stated the wage is too low. If you were to open a doctors office today and needed to hire a doctor to work for you and wanted to pay said doctor $10/hr. you wouldn't get so much as a phone call from a qualified doctor today. Same goes for any skilled profession be it engineer, accountant, or even a truck driver. Now if the job that is advertised happened to be for a cashier at a McDonalds you would have plenty of choices for employees because there are plenty of McDonald's cashiers that aren't making even $10/hr. The cashier is a low skilled job and therefore commands a lesser rate of pay. Its the employers business whether they will pay more than that, and nobody elses because its the employer taking on the risk of the business and the risk of paying higher than market rates.



The human element is the job itself. The chance to earn a living and support themselves and their families is free market capitalism working its magic. Even though not in all cases that individual will go into bigger and better things it does show initiative which counts a lot more than people realize in this world.

you dont have to profit off of employees to be in business. slavery, feudalism, state socialism, capitalism, and worker controlled jobs all can have profits.

they had markets in slavery too. markets are not unique to capitalism. and i wouldnt bow down to markets too much because the market has not produced a rising real wage in america since 1973. on top of that america has a surplus of workers because of automation, globalization, women working, and immigration, so u can't count on the market to deliver increasing standards of living. you can predict that hte market is going to continue what it has done since 1973 which is deliver stagnating or declining standards of living.

another example of market failure is vacation time is left to the free market, and it turns out americans take roughly 2 weeks vacation a year, whereas in europe they Plan vacation time by law and the people take 5 to 6 weeks vacation or more.

but my point is not about whether we should have a free market, or a planned economy. my point was that in capitalism the people who own things are benefiting far more off their workers, than the workers are by doing labor. hence the straws in the workers milkshakes. we know this is true because of the unbelievable economic (and therefore political) inequality in usa. my solution is to have people in control of their own milkshakes. end exploitation and have more widespread economic democracy.

economic democracy is already popping up in the rust belt areas, and its all over the high tech area near san fran. workers come to work bring their dogs, their new borns, they dress casual. quite often these people are republicans. i just read a city near where i live has had economic democracy growing because they had a downturn in their economy.

 

[rickyb]

Does that then make the union an unnatural detriment to capitalism?

what?

they have unions in democratic workplaces as well.

 

[rickyb]

The employer is supposed to profit from employees. That is why the employer is in business in the first place. No profit motive means no business, no business means no jobs. If an employer offers a job at $10/hr. and gets 10 candidates for said job then the market has spoken and the rate is fair. If the employer offers a job at $10/hr. and gets few or no candidates responding, and or poorly qualified candidates then the market has stated the wage is too low. If you were to open a doctors office today and needed to hire a doctor to work for you and wanted to pay said doctor $10/hr. you wouldn't get so much as a phone call from a qualified doctor today. Same goes for any skilled profession be it engineer, accountant, or even a truck driver. Now if the job that is advertised happened to be for a cashier at a McDonalds you would have plenty of choices for employees because there are plenty of McDonald's cashiers that aren't making even $10/hr. The cashier is a low skilled job and therefore commands a lesser rate of pay. Its the employers business whether they will pay more than that, and nobody elses because its the employer taking on the risk of the business and the risk of paying higher than market rates.



The human element is the job itself. The chance to earn a living and support themselves and their families is free market capitalism working its magic. Even though not in all cases that individual will go into bigger and better things it does show initiative which counts a lot more than people realize in this world.

i mean if your going to defend markets and capitalism, look at the working conditions in china. 16 hour days. working 30 days a month. wage theft. poisoned by chemicals. so much pollution they have to ground planes. those people are in a rock and a hard place, they are in no position to negotiate for any reasonable working conditions. they have cancer in their 20s.

but anyways, people who earn minimum wage in north america is also despicable. if an employer is so unprofitable that it cannot provide a living wage, then it should cease to exist. but apparently its socially acceptable for people to work 40 hours a week and go hungry, or not be able to pay the bills. i call that private profits, social cost.

 

[rickyb]

Trolling Merit Badge

funny ur constantly posting on current events, and i find you the most delusional. time to stop writing and start listening and learning from the masters.

i mean usually your posts are just pictures. sign of illiteracy.

 

[moreluck]

funny ur constantly posting on current events, and i find you the most delusional. time to stop writing and start listening and learning from the masters.

i mean usually your posts are just pictures. sign of illiteracy.

Out-standing in your field.........

 

[brett636]

you dont have to profit off of employees to be in business. slavery, feudalism, state socialism, capitalism, and worker controlled jobs all can have profits.

they had markets in slavery too. markets are not unique to capitalism. and i wouldnt bow down to markets too much because the market has not produced a rising real wage in america since 1973. on top of that america has a surplus of workers because of automation, globalization, women working, and immigration, so u can't count on the market to deliver increasing standards of living. you can predict that hte market is going to continue what it has done since 1973 which is deliver stagnating or declining standards of living.

another example of market failure is vacation time is left to the free market, and it turns out americans take roughly 2 weeks vacation a year, whereas in europe they Plan vacation time by law and the people take 5 to 6 weeks vacation or more.

but my point is not about whether we should have a free market, or a planned economy. my point was that in capitalism the people who own things are benefiting far more off their workers, than the workers are by doing labor. hence the straws in the workers milkshakes. we know this is true because of the unbelievable economic (and therefore political) inequality in usa. my solution is to have people in control of their own milkshakes. end exploitation and have more widespread economic democracy.

economic democracy is already popping up in the rust belt areas, and its all over the high tech area near san fran. workers come to work bring their dogs, their new borns, they dress casual. quite often these people are republicans. i just read a city near where i live has had economic democracy growing because they had a downturn in their economy.

You make a very common error in your reasoning when comparing capitalism to slavery. The two are worlds apart. In slavery a slave must do their "masters" bidding for no compensation without any say in the matter. A slave cannot just tell his master that he or she quits and moves onto other ventures. A free individual in a capitalist system can do exactly that. If you equate your job to slavery then you are clueless as to what slavery really entails. I've worked with many people over the years at different jobs who seemed to act as if they were stuck when the reality is they are free to change jobs and or professions as often as they like assuming they can find a niche for them to work in their new market.

As far as profiting from employees goes that, again, is the point of business. A business owner not only has to pay for the employees time, but for a multitude of other expenses like building expenses, insurance, equipment, inventory, and marketing. After all that is paid including their employees salary as a business owner you hope there is enough left to take a small chunk for yourself and leave something to reinvest in the business to help it grow. That is quite the juggling act which is why a business is so risky to start and operate successfully. Again, any employee not happy with this is free to start their own business, if they want to take on the high risk of failure.

 

[Sportello]

I think a more accurate depiction would be to say the slavery led to Capitalism, n'est-ce pas?

 

[rickyb]

You make a very common error in your reasoning when comparing capitalism to slavery. The two are worlds apart. In slavery a slave must do their "masters" bidding for no compensation without any say in the matter. A slave cannot just tell his master that he or she quits and moves onto other ventures. A free individual in a capitalist system can do exactly that. If you equate your job to slavery then you are clueless as to what slavery really entails. I've worked with many people over the years at different jobs who seemed to act as if they were stuck when the reality is they are free to change jobs and or professions as often as they like assuming they can find a niche for them to work in their new market.

As far as profiting from employees goes that, again, is the point of business. A business owner not only has to pay for the employees time, but for a multitude of other expenses like building expenses, insurance, equipment, inventory, and marketing. After all that is paid including their employees salary as a business owner you hope there is enough left to take a small chunk for yourself and leave something to reinvest in the business to help it grow. That is quite the juggling act which is why a business is so risky to start and operate successfully. Again, any employee not happy with this is free to start their own business, if they want to take on the high risk of failure.

im not saying slavery and capitalism are the same, but they have things in common like exploitation which is what this thread was about. i see that the zeitgeist movement is about ending exploitation too beginning in the 3rd world.

corporations have had record profits since the 1990s maybe farther back. these corporations are not having a hard time profiting off employees. maybe for mom and pops its hard, but not for the big guys. and if capitalism was reasonable you would know how much money you are making for the capitalist.

but its bigger than that, and thats to say if we care and love democracy so much, it should apply to our workplace. owning shares to elect a board of directors who dictate to everyone wat to do is not democratic enough.

and you know what many americans agreed with me in the 1800s. they called capitalism "wage slavery".

 

[rickyb]

The devolution of the political system through the infusion of corporate money, the rewriting of laws and regulations to remove checks on corporate power, the seizure of the press, especially the electronic press, by a handful of corporations to silence dissent, and the rise of the wholesale security and surveillance state have led to “the death of the party system” and the emergence of what Ali called “an extreme center.” Working people are being ruthlessly sacrificed on the altar of corporate profit—a scenario dramatically on display in Greece. And there is no mechanism or institution left within the structures of the capitalist system to halt or mitigate the reconfiguration of the global economy into merciless neofeudalism, a world of masters and serfs.

The cost of open defiance, which, Ali pointed out, is our only escape route from corporate tyranny, will at least at first be painful. Our corporate masters do not intend to release their death grip without a brutal fight.

 

[bleedinbrown58]

The devolution of the political system through the infusion of corporate money, the rewriting of laws and regulations to remove checks on corporate power, the seizure of the press, especially the electronic press, by a handful of corporations to silence dissent, and the rise of the wholesale security and surveillance state have led to “the death of the party system” and the emergence of what Ali called “an extreme center.” Working people are being ruthlessly sacrificed on the altar of corporate profit—a scenario dramatically on display in Greece. And there is no mechanism or institution left within the structures of the capitalist system to halt or mitigate the reconfiguration of the global economy into merciless neofeudalism, a world of masters and serfs.

The cost of open defiance, which, Ali pointed out, is our only escape route from corporate tyranny, will at least at first be painful. Our corporate masters do not intend to release their death grip without a brutal fight.

Don't plagiarIze....cite your sources.

 

[rickyb]

Don't plagiarIze....cite your sources.

Ali said he fears that should Americans become politically conscious and resist, the corporate state will impose naked forms of militarized repression. Government’s reaction to the 2013 bombings at the Boston Marathon stunned him. Authorities “closed down an entire city with the support of the population.” He said that the virtual declaration of martial law in Boston was “a dress rehearsal.”

 

[rickyb]

Don't plagiarIze....cite your sources.

Ali said that the failure on the part of citizens to build mass movements to dismantle wholesale surveillance in the wake of the revelations by Edward Snowden was an example of our collective self-delusion and our complicity in our own oppression. The cult of the self, a product of neoliberal corporate propaganda, infects every aspect of society and culture and leads to paralysis.

 

[rickyb]

12 year olds, 14 year olds, working 18 hour days making fashion, and dying in unsafe conditions.

yes, reforms could be done, just like we could reform slavery or feudalism. but ulitimately capitalism, like these systems, must be abolished and workers must own and control the jobs they work in. then there will be less of a chance of unsafe conditions, under paid / wage slavery, and being over worked.

side note john oliver has a lot of viddys and if u dont pay attention to the political economy, john is not a bad place to start.