The loss is in their life, body and time. Do you think they experience a high quality of life or are they sacrificing that to get the basics to eat and shelter?
I’m going to stop replying to you now. Got better uses of my time than arguing with a AnCap/Libertarian.
Life, body, and time are leaving you at this very moment whether you work the farm or not. What “profit” is in this context is the quality of your life. In capitalism, they have the right to choose which option best furthers their lives.
Do I think there should be better standards for workers and more regulations and taxes on the rich? Yes. Does that mean we have to tear down capitalism? No.
As a wage laborer, I am chosen by a capitalist or their delegate, to do work for a wage. I can choose from a handful of places offering similar wages. The wage may allow me to pay rent on a place to live, transportation and acquire food.
If I do not take a job from the handful that I compete for with others, I will be homeless, without access to transportation and without food. For the wage laborer, capitalism is get lucky and find a wage contract or starve.
While working I produce enough to cover more than that wage. The capitalist pockets the excess of my labor. I live pay check to pay check. The capitalist buys another home. The extraction is in the exchange of labor for wages.
If you lived in a bare minimum stable democracy there would likely be plenty of options for food if not housing, and that’s still considered like mid-tier social safety net at best. Capitalism doesn’t necessitate any unfair concentration of wealth to the top, that isn’t what the word means.
Tearing down and removing all traces of Capitalism does not solve any of the problems of food or housing security. In fact, in the two largest attempts ever made to remove capitalism, the USSR and the CCP revolutions, millions of people died because of failure to produce food to meet demands.
The loss is in their life, body and time. Do you think they experience a high quality of life or are they sacrificing that to get the basics to eat and shelter?
I’m going to stop replying to you now. Got better uses of my time than arguing with a AnCap/Libertarian.
Life, body, and time are leaving you at this very moment whether you work the farm or not. What “profit” is in this context is the quality of your life. In capitalism, they have the right to choose which option best furthers their lives.
Do I think there should be better standards for workers and more regulations and taxes on the rich? Yes. Does that mean we have to tear down capitalism? No.
As a wage laborer, I am chosen by a capitalist or their delegate, to do work for a wage. I can choose from a handful of places offering similar wages. The wage may allow me to pay rent on a place to live, transportation and acquire food.
If I do not take a job from the handful that I compete for with others, I will be homeless, without access to transportation and without food. For the wage laborer, capitalism is get lucky and find a wage contract or starve.
While working I produce enough to cover more than that wage. The capitalist pockets the excess of my labor. I live pay check to pay check. The capitalist buys another home. The extraction is in the exchange of labor for wages.
If you lived in a bare minimum stable democracy there would likely be plenty of options for food if not housing, and that’s still considered like mid-tier social safety net at best. Capitalism doesn’t necessitate any unfair concentration of wealth to the top, that isn’t what the word means.
Tearing down and removing all traces of Capitalism does not solve any of the problems of food or housing security. In fact, in the two largest attempts ever made to remove capitalism, the USSR and the CCP revolutions, millions of people died because of failure to produce food to meet demands.