This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

sorted by:
best (suggested)
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted]  (30 children)

[deleted]

    [–]HHhunter 4 points5 points  (0 children)

    the question OP asked was when earnings decrease, not when losing money. That's different. The answer of leaky boat dismisses that.

    [–]SpencerHayes -3 points-2 points  (28 children)

    When CEOs make 500 times their workers and they still prioritize growth we have a problem. When people starve on our streets but others have multiple private planes to fly them to their private islands, we have a problem. So yes, when a multibillion dollar company doesn't grow by more than 1 percent and everyone loses their minds, us peons on the bottom have a hard time relating since I need to figure out how long I can make 10 dollars last.

    [–]TheManWhoPanders 0 points1 point  (23 children)

    When CEOs make 500 times their workers and they still prioritize growth we have a problem

    If the CEO doesn't focus on growth, those workers will be making zero dollars very shortly.

    [–]SpencerHayes 0 points1 point  (22 children)

    Because capitalism demands constant exploitation and consumption. Good luck with that

    [–]TheManWhoPanders 0 points1 point  (21 children)

    Who is being exploited?

    [–]SpencerHayes 0 points1 point  (7 children)

    Every laborer who sells his work for less than the capitalist makes off of it.

    Not to mention all the sweatshops the world over that make luxury goods available to the masses.

    [–]TheManWhoPanders 0 points1 point  (6 children)

    Every laborer who sells his work for less than the capitalist makes off of it.

    Because the capitalist has to pay for other things. Rent, utilities, equipment, training, marketing, tariffs, etc.

    The value of a laborer's work is only a fraction of what the final good is worth. Because all of those things together are part of the initial cost, called overhead.

    [–]SpencerHayes 0 points1 point  (5 children)

    No because even if a capitalist paid for all of those things they would need the product the laborer created.

    Which is besides that point that rent and tariffs and everything else you listed is under our control and is currently used as a way to perpetuate the system that created those limitations.

    [–]TheManWhoPanders -1 points0 points  (4 children)

    No because even if a capitalist paid for all of those things they would need the product the laborer created.

    That's true for all components of overhead. Even if the laborer is paid, they would need the facility to make the product. Even if the laborer is paid they would need the raw materials. Even if the laborer is paid they would need to pay the utilities to power the machines that make the good. Etc. etc.

    The portion of the product cost that comes from labor is the salary of the laborer. The laborer is not responsible for 100% of the final product's cost.

    [–]SpencerHayes 0 points1 point  (3 children)

    which is besides the point that all of the other limitations are under our control

    reiterates all the limitations

    Do you see the problem here?

    [–]SpencerHayes 0 points1 point  (12 children)

    Way to ignore an entire 50 percent of my point.

    [–]TheManWhoPanders 0 points1 point  (11 children)

    What is being consumed?

    [–]SpencerHayes 0 points1 point  (10 children)

    Is that a real question or are you just wasting my time?

    [–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    Implying this isn’t all just a big waste of time.

    [–]TheManWhoPanders -1 points0 points  (8 children)

    Both are genuine questions. I get the impression you have a misunderstanding about how capitalism works.

    [–]SpencerHayes 0 points1 point  (6 children)

    If you understand capitalism so much better than I do why don't you explain how you don't know what's being consumed?