Is profit different from unfair tax?

[Velociryx]

1) Tools enhance productivity. They enable you to make more stuff with less effort.

2) Tools do not appear magically out of thin air. Someone has to make and invent them. Think them up if they don't already exist.

3) That process is work. Work should be rewarded.

4) There are many ways such compensation could be rewarded, and one of those ways, commonly used in today's economy, is the Licensing Agreement. That means, you use my tool to enhance your productivity, and I get a small chunk of the gain you realize.

5) Since you could not produce as much pre-tool as post, you are gaining, not losing. Since you are freely electing to use the fruits of my brain, MY labor to enhance your productivity, your productivity is no longer a function of YOUR work alone. It is your work, enhanced by my tool. Thus, it is not exploitative nor treating you unfairly in any way.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Velociryx
And how does the system "treat you" in this example?

It gives you a clear choice: Continue as you are, with a productive capacity of 10 per day, or double it to 20/day, and give me one for providing you the means of doing so...for turning your work, into our work.

-=Vel=-

What I'm I missing? If I produce 10 a day I want compensation for producing 10 a day and if I produce 20 a day I want compensation for producing 20 a day. If the tool is owned by the community and I get compensated for the full benefit of my work why should I want a system that doesn't compensate me for the full benefit of my work?

[Japher]

Specialization.

Henry Ford's real invention, and the reason why I haven't learned to be a tailor, carpenter, or butcher. Without them I would be naked and hungry living on the streets, and they would be without whatever service I provide. Granted if society wasn't the way it is today I would know how to sew, build, and butcher but then we would be so far behind from where we are now, because instead of people spending time learning chemisty, physics, engineering, etc. to create the inventions that make our lives so much easier and or more comnfortable we would all still be busy being selfish greedy communist doing only for ourselves what it is we know how.

Services.

[Velociryx]

Yes, the tool improves your productivity, but I made the tool. There would BE no improvement to your productivity if not for the tool. Your work is no longer simply Your Work.

It is our work, your labor, enhanced by a tool that's not yours.

[Velociryx]

Kid, because it's not YOUR work.

It's your work, enhanced by a tool provided to you by a third party.

This is not rocket science, but each person is not a self contained island of work. We use tools. We use tools we don't own....which means that we can't take full credit for the work we produce, cos some of that credit is due to those who provided the tools.
Are you really THAT blind?

-=Vel=-

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Velociryx
2) Tools do not appear magically out of thin air. Someone has to make and invent them. Think them up if they don't already exist.

Of course. I'm not against tools. Let's make what we need. I only oppose you owning the tools that I use.

Originally posted by Velociryx
5) Since you could not produce as much pre-tool as post, you are gaining, not losing. Since you are freely electing to use the fruits of my brain, MY labor to enhance your productivity, your productivity is no longer a function of YOUR work alone. It is your work, enhanced by my tool. Thus, it is not exploitative nor treating you unfairly in any way.

If it's not exploitive than why do you hire me to use the tool?

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Japher
Specialization.

Henry Ford's real invention, and the reason why I haven't learned to be a tailor, carpenter, or butcher. Without them I would be naked and hungry living on the streets, and they would be without whatever service I provide. Granted if society wasn't the way it is today I would know how to sew, build, and butcher but then we would be so far behind from where we are now, because instead of people spending time learning chemisty, physics, engineering, etc. to create the inventions that make our lives so much easier and or more comnfortable we would all still be busy being selfish greedy communist doing only for ourselves what it is we know how.

Services.

True. Point?

[Velociryx]

Nothing kid. we have no point. obviously.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Velociryx
Yes, the tool improves your productivity, but I made the tool. There would BE no improvement to your productivity if not for the tool. Your work is no longer simply Your Work.

It is our work, your labor, enhanced by a tool that's not yours.

We are going in circles.

If you have built the tool and someone else uses it you should be compensated for your labor. No problem there. The problem is when you profit from my labor. That is different from simply being compensated for your labor.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Velociryx
which means that we can't take full credit for the work we produce, cos some of that credit is due to those who provided the tools.
Are you really THAT blind?

-=Vel=-

This is my argument.

[Velociryx]

Not true. My tool that I built is useless until it enhances someone else's producitivty. It just takes up space till then.

So when YOU use my tool to enhance your productivity, it's not just a matter of your labor anymore. Your labor isn't what allows you to produce 20/day, that's a function of your labor + my tool.

So I get a slice of the pie and we're even. You're getting the lion's share of the increase you enjoy thanks to our joint efforts, and I get a tiny bit.

-=Vel=-

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by DAVOUT
The only way for Kidicious to reach his ideal not exploitive economic system is the individual absolute autarky. No more labour contractual agreement, no more sales at pseudo agreed prices ; I grow the corn with which I make my bread, I carve my sabots in the wood of the tree I cut myself, and nobody can even try to benefit from my (hard) work. Commerce and cooperation are evil traps invented to exploit me, and I much prefer the hardship of absolute autarky which provides hardly enough food, let alone healthcare and comfort, with a life expectancy not exceeding 30 years.

I'm not really an idealist. I just try to keep my argument consistant.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Velociryx
Not true. My tool that I built is useless until it enhances someone else's producitivty. It just takes up space till then.

So when YOU use my tool to enhance your productivity, it's not just a matter of your labor anymore. Your labor isn't what allows you to produce 20/day, that's a function of your labor + my tool.

So I get a slice of the pie and we're even. You're getting the lion's share of the increase you enjoy thanks to our joint efforts, and I get a tiny bit.

-=Vel=-

The community should compensate you for your labor in making the tool. That should be the end of it. You shouldn't profit after that. You have been compensated for your labor.

[Kidlicious]

Vel,

Am I missing something in your argument? Are you proposing that people who make tools should be compensated more than people who don't.

[DAVOUT]

Originally posted by Kidicious

There should be community owned computers, yes.

I am also strongly in favor of community owned brains.