"only fork in existence"

There’s still metal

I think I see - you're saying that there's some kind of "usefulness" or practicality, consideration, i.e. a fancy painting might have an insane exchange value, but it's "use value" is likely to be quite low.

Is that right?

Trying to find flaw in a real system using impossible scenarios is cool it’s just not helpful

does the labor have the right to renegotiate their wages as mor spaghetti folks come along?

Rephrase if u don’t mind

I'd also like clarification

Neo liberalism is enthralled with exchange value. Marxism sees use value.

Marxism has always failed, and usually ends in starvation

Sure, but in your folk example above, if it truly was the ony fork in existence, someone clever would come up with some alternative to meet the same need. That's something I think capitalism actually does pretty well.

Is there a departure of labor from profit that in your mind would be immoral?

Specify the example you gave earlier I’m curious

And wym

you're saying making x amount of profit relative to paying workers y? CEOs who make 10000x what the lower workers make?

I actually gotta jump off again. Zoom meeting. Maybe we can pick it back up later?

I should get back to work to haha

Sure

Later all

In a functioning labor market these two lines are suppose to be inseparable.

First off that doesn’t really account with how much more efficient we’ve gotten overall. People working at new machines are more productive than workers of old, but there jobs might be easier therefor making their labor work less

But regardless, that can be fixed if workers grow a spine. Or consumers for that matter

Consumers can boycott and workers can strike to incentivize change They just don’t. That is a collective action problem. It’s not like their being kept down. They just won’t rise

@Delta comfort tends to lead to apathy or complacency

True. Our society is so coddling there aren’t enough workers and consumers that are disillusioned to stoke or boycott

Strike

There’s a collective action problem. An apathy problem. But it’s not a systemic oppression problem @brucebruce is absolutely right

that is correct.

and some seem to think the only way to collectively make change comes by way of forcing folks to be in the collective.

if the collective doesn't have the desire or motivation to do such, what sort of freedom do they truly have if an organization is going to coerce or force them into the collective

^^^

to try argue the other side of that discussion is that the least of these, or oppressed have no means by which to rise up at all

so the daddy union/gov/collective has to drag them along or squash the accused oppressors

So would you support a union deciding to redact their productive capability until wages are increased?

> So would you support a union deciding to redact their productive capability until wages are increased?
@Malachi bruh that’s simple...eliminate minimum wage laws and let the wages be determined by supply and demand

Hey Oz, so is that a yes or no?

I don’t see a problem with what you said Malachi

Would anyone here identify with Laissez-faire ideologies?

It’s kinda the opposite of Keynes right?

I'm not sure. Laissez-faire is generally refereed to as "free market"