Comments on: Explaining Exploitation http://economsoc.wordpress.com Putting social ownership back into socialism Sat, 10 Oct 2009 21:52:38 +0000 http://wordpress.com/ hourly 1 By: kenneth ivey http://economsoc.wordpress.com/capitalist-exploitation/#comment-567 kenneth ivey Sun, 29 Mar 2009 23:12:11 +0000 http://economsoc.wordpress.com/capitalist-exploitation/#comment-567 I cannot believe an American could think in this way. I started out poor with nothing and with hard work and not government handouts I made a good life. Some of my friends didn’t but they wanted to take the easy way. So they don’t have as much as me. Now with your system they would have the same as me and you say that is fair. Not so. We (this country) fought two wars and a cold war against this sort of government. I will fight it with the very last breath in my body I had rather be dead than live in your vision of the world look at North Korea to see what you are calling for. I think not. Ken I cannot believe an American could think in this way. I started out poor with nothing and with hard work and not government handouts I made a good life. Some of my friends didn’t but they wanted to take the easy way. So they don’t have as much as me. Now with your system they would have the same as me and you say that is fair. Not so. We (this country) fought two wars and a cold war against this sort of government. I will fight it with the very last breath in my body I had rather be dead than live in your vision of the world look at North Korea to see what you are calling for. I think not.

Ken

]]> By: John Humphreys http://economsoc.wordpress.com/capitalist-exploitation/#comment-101 John Humphreys Mon, 24 Nov 2008 08:41:22 +0000 http://economsoc.wordpress.com/capitalist-exploitation/#comment-101 To produce something you need multiple inputs. If somebody else has those inputs then you need to convince them to let you use them. There are three ways for humans to interact, through (1) love, (2) trade, or (3) force. So you could ask them nicely to use their product (love). Or you could offer them something in exchange for their product (trade). Or you could use force/coercion to acquire their product (force). I think love is the best way to coordinate society. But sometimes love is not enough. The person who mines the lead in Uruguay does not love the person who needs a pencil in Singapore enough to just send it over. There are many other examples of where love is not sufficient. Now you have a decision to make -- which alternative mechanism do we use to coordinate human behaviour? Trade or force? I prefer trade. Voluntary trading for capital does not "exploit" anybody in any meaningful sense of the word. A firm may need capital and labour. If the capital owner and labour owner don't love the firm, then the firm will need to engage in trade with both capital-owner and labour-owner. Markets will tend to a position where the firm has an incentive to pay the resource owners roughly the marginal productivity of their input. Nothing wrong with that. To produce something you need multiple inputs. If somebody else has those inputs then you need to convince them to let you use them. There are three ways for humans to interact, through (1) love, (2) trade, or (3) force.

So you could ask them nicely to use their product (love).

Or you could offer them something in exchange for their product (trade).

Or you could use force/coercion to acquire their product (force).

I think love is the best way to coordinate society. But sometimes love is not enough. The person who mines the lead in Uruguay does not love the person who needs a pencil in Singapore enough to just send it over. There are many other examples of where love is not sufficient.

Now you have a decision to make — which alternative mechanism do we use to coordinate human behaviour? Trade or force? I prefer trade.

Voluntary trading for capital does not “exploit” anybody in any meaningful sense of the word. A firm may need capital and labour. If the capital owner and labour owner don’t love the firm, then the firm will need to engage in trade with both capital-owner and labour-owner. Markets will tend to a position where the firm has an incentive to pay the resource owners roughly the marginal productivity of their input. Nothing wrong with that.

]]>