this post was submitted on 16 Jul 2024
141 points (98.0% liked)

chapotraphouse

13528 readers
887 users here now

Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.

No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer

Gossip posts go in c/gossip. Don't post low-hanging fruit here after it gets removed from c/gossip

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] mayo_cider@hexbear.net 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

A single worker doesn't produce 100% of the value, but 100% of the value is produced by the workers and 0% by the investors

[–] Kolibri@hexbear.net 3 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

I think you're missing my point. I'm not arguing value isn't produced by the workers. I'm more saying if you think that surplus value is gonna go back into the workers that made it, that not entirely correct. Since as Marx points out, there would be deductions made and such like for the total working class, but someone making surplus-value isn't gonna get 100% of it back. Also to point something else out. Nature is a source of value to just as much as labor is.

[–] mayo_cider@hexbear.net 3 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Sorry, reading back my reply it sounds way more antagonistic than I intended

I agree with everything you said, my point was just that the current investment market is not the same as paying back a portion of the value you produce

[–] Kolibri@hexbear.net 3 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Okay, sorry for being aggressive and yea it def. isn't the same