Are labor supply and freedom related?

[aneeshm]

Kid , you haven't really answered my question .

On that island , there was a lot of land . Berz took only 0.5 % of the arable , fertile land . You had the rest of it ( 9.5 % ) if you wanted to work it . He worked on it first , and thus has a moral claim on both the land and his produce . Assuming that due to incompetence , you are not able / not willing to grow your own food . He , seeing your predicament come winter , offers you the job of workign his land in exchange for food . He has free itme to improve his standard of living , but you do not .


Is he , in this case , exploiting you ?

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Velociryx
Except insofar as you wanna take his stuff and force him to take care of you, eh?

-=Vel=-

I don't care if you think that.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by aneeshm
Kid , you haven't really answered my question .

On that island , there was a lot of land . Berz took only 0.5 % of the arable , fertile land . You had the rest of it ( 9.5 % ) if you wanted to work it . He worked on it first , and thus has a moral claim on both the land and his produce . Assuming that due to incompetence , you are not able / not willing to grow your own food . He , seeing your predicament come winter , offers you the job of workign his land in exchange for food . He has free itme to improve his standard of living , but you do not .


Is he , in this case , exploiting you ?

If he worked the land he deserves something for that if others benefit from his work. That's not the same thing.

Trying to take things to the extremes again, huh? Why do you do that anyway?

[aneeshm]

I'm definitely not taking anthing to an extreme . The situation described above is usually what happens when everyone starts out with equal resources . What I said above is what leads to different "classes" of people , ay you refer to them .

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Kidicious


If he worked the land he deserves something for that if others benefit from his work. That's not the same thing.

Trying to take things to the extremes again, huh? Why do you do that anyway?

No extremes .. . its just a simple example designed to highlight principles and basic questions about your concepts such as whether people are entitled to the fruits of their labours.

Where I always find a disconnect is when a worker works hard and then converts their efforts into some asset that you would classify as a "means of production". The idea that paying people to use this asset or charging them rent for the use of it, is exploitation is a concept I just cannot accept or understand.

I just see nothing immoral in a ditchdigger saving up for a tractor and then increasing his standard of living by allowing others to use it in some form by which he profits

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by aneeshm
I'm definitely not taking anthing to an extreme . The situation described above is usually what happens when everyone starts out with equal resources . What I said above is what leads to different "classes" of people , ay you refer to them .

And when do people start out with equal resources?

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Flubber



No extremes .. . its just a simple example designed to highlight principles and basic questions about your concepts such as whether people are entitled to the fruits of their labours.

Where I always find a disconnect is when a worker works hard and then converts their efforts into some asset that you would classify as a "means of production". The idea that paying people to use this asset or charging them rent for the use of it, is exploitation is a concept I just cannot accept or understand.

I just see nothing immoral in a ditchdigger saving up for a tractor and then increasing his standard of living by allowing others to use it in some form by which he profits

Because he only worked to produce the tractor. He deserves compensation for that. When others use it they deserve ALL of the fruits of their labor. Saying that the owner of the tractor should get some of the fruits of the laborer is in contradiciton to your principle. Why in the hell can't you see that?

[Arrian]

And when do people start out with equal resources?

In a theoretical communism paradise, right?

Or I am still not wanted in this discussion?

-Arrian

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Arrian


In a theoretical communism paradise, right?

Or I am still not wanted in this discussion?

-Arrian

No. If it were a communist society no one would own the land. Depending on the society they would either share the produce no matter who worked or they would be compensated for the amount of work that each did. I propose that latter.

[Velociryx]

It's hardly a contradiction.

I have a tractor. You don't. I'm willing to let you use it, provided that you're willing to pay me a "usage fee" (since you don't like the term "rent").

Well and good. You now have a choice. You can make your life easier, pay me for the use of MY tractor, or you can use a shovel, and whine about how much harder it is. You can either use your savings OR a part of whatever you produce using my tractor to pay the usage fee. I don't care, and I'm not forcing you to do either.

I'm also not FORCING you to use my tractor. But you're sure not using it without paying the usage fee.

-=Vel=-

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Velociryx
It's hardly a contradiction.

I have a tractor. You don't. I'm willing to let you use it, provided that you're willing to pay me a "usage fee" (since you don't like the term "rent").
-=Vel=-

Why do you deserve rent? Because of work that you do, or because you own the tractor?

[Arrian]

Originally posted by Kidicious


No. If it were a communist society no one would own the land. Depending on the society they would either share the produce no matter who worked or they would be compensated for the amount of work that each did. I propose that latter.

Ok, so in theory some people will still be compensated more than others, because some people will work harder (or smarter, or both) than others, right? So some people will get "rich" (comparatively).

Can people own anything? I mean, personal items, surely. But any sort of tools?

-Arrian

[Arrian]

Originally posted by Kidicious

Why do you deserve rent? Because of work that you do, or because you own the tractor?

He worked, saved money, and bought the tractor.

Here's a question... why do you deserve to use the tractor that Vel saved for and bought?

...

However, it is my understanding that under your system the tractor would not be owned by Vel in the first place, right? The government would own it, and people would rent it (useage fee, rent, whatever. Same thing).

Who decides how many tractors are needed, which type, etc? The government, right? Those people will control... the means of production. Uh-oh...

-Arrian

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Arrian
Can people own anything? I mean, personal items, surely. But any sort of tools?

-Arrian

In some cases it's efficient for people to own their own tools, if they use them frequently.

[Velociryx]

Usage fee, Kid...Usage fee. Not rent, remember? Same reason that the state charges one. It makes the allocation of my resource more efficient.

Also, there is the issue of what constitutes YOUR work.

Your work is the amount of work you can do.

By using MY tractor, I am an enabler. I am enabling you to do more work. Thus, as the facilitator of your greater productivity, I am entitled to a usage fee, as it creates for you, a situation where you are more productive with my tool than you were without it.

Based on the price (the amount of my usage fee) it falls to you to determine if it is "worth it" (ie, is the increased in productivity worth the fee)

Simple stuff, really.

-=Vel=-