"throw capitalism at it" ad absurdum

[untermensche]

Morality plays a point, but we are talking the difference between an agreed upon choice compared to a non agreed choice. Rape is having sex with someone who says no, but having consensual sex isn't. He's trying to say that consensual sex is rape.

The transaction is moral if you pay what you think you would deserve for the same service.

Not when you pay as little as current conditions allow.

 

[LordKiran]

1. Which has nothing to do with the topic-at-hand in the first place, so don't throw stones in glass houses.

2. Doesn't answer my question, both employee and consumer are investing something into the business with the expectation of getting something in return, so why should one be given decision-making privileges but not the other?

3. Also doesn't answer my question. You also shouldn't argue from a position of morality as it's the weakest argument you can make.

This has everything to do with that I'm talking about. [1]

Human morality is the highest position.

If you are talking about other things, good luck with all that. [2]

- - - Updated - - -

You can't know how much it would take to get you to do it?

Did you just have a stroke?

Lose the attitude, it's not called for.

Lose the attitude.

Children do not dictate to me.[3]

1. The topic of the thread is not the moral implications of certain corporate structures, you hypocrite.

2. Running away from my valid logical objections to your point of view? Pitiful.

3. No that giant chip on your shoulder and twig up your ass dictate to you, obviously.

 

[coloradoatheist]

Morality plays a point, but we are talking the difference between an agreed upon choice compared to a non agreed choice. Rape is having sex with someone who says no, but having consensual sex isn't. He's trying to say that consensual sex is rape.

The transaction is moral if you pay what you think you would deserve for the same service.

Not when you pay as little as current conditions allow.

But the same applies when you buy something. Should you feel morally wrong when you go to 7/11 and would pay $2.50 for a pepsi that's $2? Are you stealing from the company?

 

[KeepTalking]

Are you forgetting your position that capitalism is the same as a dictatorship? Given that position, it seems that most of those democracies to which you refer are still actually dictatorships.

I draw distinctions between government and economic institutions.

Cool, I thought you being a bit self-contradictory, but that clears it up for me.

They are actually separate things even if presently intertwined.

That likely added to my confusion.

In government huge struggles rid humanity of dictators.

It is time humans rid themselves of the immorality of dictatorship in the workplace too.

And the dictatorial power that is most concerning is the dictatorial control of finances and planning.

This allows businesses to steal from workers and send jobs overseas.

The concern is not that in an organization there is a division of labor and some will lead while most follow.

While I now understand the nuance of your position. I find it hard to entirely agree that a "dictatorial" power structure in a corporation is as negative as it is with regard to governments. I think unions are a good answer to check the power of corporations over workers, unfortunately, unions are currently under attack by the right wing. Those "right to work (for shit wages)" laws are all the rage in red states right now, and something needs to be done about it.

If you need labor you must pay for it.

You cannot create some structure where those at the top steal from all below.

Sure you can. History is replete with examples, see slavery.

I did not mean it was impossible.

I meant it was immoral.

Paying for labor gives nobody the right to create some petty dictatorship.

Okay, I agree with you in that case.

- - - Updated - - -

And now let's add a third party

I think people will like Lemonade in in my neighborhood but I don't want to be the one selling it so for that kid I say I will pay him $7 an hour to do it but I will be everything else. I sell the lemonade for $15 an hour. And it costs me $7 an hour to get the stuff. So I make $1 an hour, the kid makes $7 and my neighbors get lemonade. Three parties mutually benefit and under your system all three parties don't do it and three parties miss out.

How do you sell lemonade by the hour? I would think that you would sell it by the cup, or by the ounce.

 

[coloradoatheist]

[

How do you sell lemonade by the hour? I would think that you would sell it by the cup, or by the ounce.

I was simplifying the example.

But it brings up an interesting point

What is the time frame used for determining who is stealing? If the lemonade stand has revenue of $6 at 10 am $10 at 11am and noon but $6 at 1pm is the worker stealing from the owner at 10am and 1pm and the owner stealing from the worker at 11am and noon?

 

[untermensche]

The transaction is moral if you pay what you think you would deserve for the same service.

Not when you pay as little as current conditions allow.

But the same applies when you buy something. Should you feel morally wrong when you go to 7/11 and would pay $2.50 for a pepsi that's $2? Are you stealing from the company?

The price of things is related to the cost of labor.

You cannot dictate the cost of things be lower.

 

[coloradoatheist]

But the same applies when you buy something. Should you feel morally wrong when you go to 7/11 and would pay $2.50 for a pepsi that's $2? Are you stealing from the company?

The price of things is related to the cost of labor.

You cannot dictate the cost of things be lower.

It's indirectly yes, but several factors apply. But you argument is that paying too low for something is morally wrong. So should I feel guilty for buying a pepsi below the price of what I would pay for it?

 

[ksen]

Within a dictatorial structure those at the top giving orders are free.

No they're not.

It's an odd sort of freedom when one is surrounded by high walls and armed guards, and cannot go outside without a police escort, for fear of being shot dead.

Maybe if they stopped trying to loot everyone people wouldn't be so eager to shoot them dead.

 

[untermensche]

The price of things is related to the cost of labor.

You cannot dictate the cost of things be lower.

It's indirectly yes, but several factors apply. But you argument is that paying too low for something is morally wrong. So should I feel guilty for buying a pepsi below the price of what I would pay for it?

There is no "what you should pay for it".

There is the cost of making it and profit.

The only question is how much profit will you be willing to give, not that you can dictate the price drop below costs of production.

 

[coloradoatheist]

It's indirectly yes, but several factors apply. But you argument is that paying too low for something is morally wrong. So should I feel guilty for buying a pepsi below the price of what I would pay for it?

There is no "what you should pay for it".

There is the cost of making it and profit.

The only question is how much profit will you be willing to give, not that you can dictate the price drop below costs of production.

the company can dictate price. But I am talking about as a buyer having a moral problem with the same behavior of trying to find the lowest price for goods.

 

[Axulus]

The price of things is related to the cost of labor.

You cannot dictate the cost of things be lower.

It's indirectly yes, but several factors apply. But you argument is that paying too low for something is morally wrong. So should I feel guilty for buying a pepsi below the price of what I would pay for it?

Not only the cost you would be willing to pay for it, but the amount that you must be paid for you to be willing make the pepsi yourself for someone else as per his lawn mowing example.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Morality plays a point, but we are talking the difference between an agreed upon choice compared to a non agreed choice. Rape is having sex with someone who says no, but having consensual sex isn't. He's trying to say that consensual sex is rape.

The transaction is moral if you pay what you think you would deserve for the same service.

Not when you pay as little as current conditions allow.

Interesting. As a full time electrical engineer, my hourly pay is significantly more than minimum wage. Therefore my hours are individually worth more than minimum wage. Therefore if I am buying a hamburger at McDonalds, the cashier and the frycook should both receive engineer pay while serving me, but receive minimum wage when serving a fellow minimum wage earner.

That would make an interesting accounting snarl.

 

[untermensche]

The transaction is moral if you pay what you think you would deserve for the same service.

Not when you pay as little as current conditions allow.

Interesting. As a full time electrical engineer, my hourly pay is significantly more than minimum wage. Therefore my hours are individually worth more than minimum wage. Therefore if I am buying a hamburger at McDonalds, the cashier and the frycook should both receive engineer pay while serving me, but receive minimum wage when serving a fellow minimum wage earner.

That would make an interesting accounting snarl.

I understand that morality is tough for those who only know capitalism. It has no inherent morality. It says to exploit to the greatest extent in law.

Their pay should be what you would expect for the same work, not other work.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Interesting. As a full time electrical engineer, my hourly pay is significantly more than minimum wage. Therefore my hours are individually worth more than minimum wage. Therefore if I am buying a hamburger at McDonalds, the cashier and the frycook should both receive engineer pay while serving me, but receive minimum wage when serving a fellow minimum wage earner.

That would make an interesting accounting snarl.

I understand that morality is tough for those who only know capitalism. It has no inherent morality. It says to exploit to the greatest extent in law.

Their pay should be what you would expect for the same work, not other work.

But I know what my time is worth. If I am doing work, whether it be testing a circuit or reeling a cable, that is what my time is worth. Others can also reel cables for less. If I were flipping burgers I would call myself "under-employed" while others would call themselves "employed". You are getting even more inconsistent than ususal.

 

[untermensche]

There is no "what you should pay for it".

There is the cost of making it and profit.

The only question is how much profit will you be willing to give, not that you can dictate the price drop below costs of production.

the company can dictate price. But I am talking about as a buyer having a moral problem with the same behavior of trying to find the lowest price for goods.

The company cannot dictate that anybody buy their product.

It can only charge what people are willing to spend.

The buyer only has a moral problem is he can somehow use hardship to force the price to lower.

 

[untermensche]

I understand that morality is tough for those who only know capitalism. It has no inherent morality. It says to exploit to the greatest extent in law.

Their pay should be what you would expect for the same work, not other work.

But I know what my time is worth. If I am doing work, whether it be testing a circuit or reeling a cable, that is what my time is worth. Others can also reel cables for less. If I were flipping burgers I would call myself "under-employed" while others would call themselves "employed". You are getting even more inconsistent than ususal.

This is about what your labor is worth. Not your time.

When you are doing something technical your labor is worth more, sure.

But what the person should be paid is what you would expect to be paid for doing the same thing.

That is morality.

I know it is tough for some to put themselves into the place of others. This is called empathy.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

It is not about empathy, and time is how sane people measure their labor in many if not most cases.

 

[untermensche]

It is not about empathy, and time is how sane people measure their labor in many if not most cases.

I thought we wanted to look at this morally.

You simply want to claim the current morality is beyond examination.

 

[coloradoatheist]

the company can dictate price. But I am talking about as a buyer having a moral problem with the same behavior of trying to find the lowest price for goods.

The company cannot dictate that anybody buy their product.

It can only charge what people are willing to spend.

The buyer only has a moral problem is he can somehow use hardship to force the price to lower.

But if you were willing to give a company $4 for a product that you are only paying $2 then you are stealing $2 from the company. That's your argument when it's reversed.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

It is not about empathy, and time is how sane people measure their labor in many if not most cases.

I thought we wanted to look at this morally.

You simply want to claim the current morality is beyond examination.

For us to look at this morally, we'd have to agree on a shared moral premise. You think I'm either amoral or immoral. I think the same about you.