Is surplus value, - theft or not?

[promethean75]

"AHA! So you're saying it's the fault of the wicked purchaser, not the employer"

Wut? You totally lost me. I feel like you don't know what's going on here, sir.

[Immanuel Can]

"AHA! So you're saying it's the fault of the wicked purchaser, not the employer"

Wut? You totally lost me. I feel like you don't know what's going on here, sir.

Yes, I guess you're lost.

You said that it was the market that set the price of what the labourer gets. Well, what anything sells for is not set by the employer of the labourer, but by what the purchaser will choose to pay. If he won't pay $7, then the labourer can't get $7. (Never mind that you're then saying the employer/ owner should then get nothing, as should the supplier, the marketer, the social programs, the taxes -- let's pretend all that's not even an issue.)

Since the purchaser sets the price, the purchaser sets the possible wage. So it must be the purchaser who is the evil oppressor, the one who is depriving the worker of 'his' $7.

You can see that theory is quite absurd. Maybe the employee should quit and get his own taco truck, which presumably somebody will give him for free. Then he can charge $35 per taco, and be rich.

[promethean75]

"So...you think cheese is free, meat is free, trucks are free, advertising is free, innovation is free, social taxation is free, medical and retirement programs are free...None of them can be counted into the price of the taco. But putting ingredients you didn't buy, in a truck you don't own, with marketing you didn't pay for, into a taco shell you didn't create is worth 100% of what that gets sold for?"

Yeah, i dunno man I've already replied to that elsewhere. Capitalist's appropriate materials produced by his own or other workers. He will buy beef from another capitalist supplier. He will factor that price in when he sets the price for the taco. The sale price of the taco will be more than the wage paid and more than the price of the beef, or else he makes no profit.

So, in fact, you're right about the $7 when factoring material costs. The taco maker isn't worth all $7 of that taco, but the capitalist still isn't worth any of it. You showed that when you pointed out some other product of labor involved in the production of the taco, ese.

[Immanuel Can]

"So...you think cheese is free, meat is free, trucks are free, advertising is free, innovation is free, social taxation is free, medical and retirement programs are free...None of them can be counted into the price of the taco. But putting ingredients you didn't buy, in a truck you don't own, with marketing you didn't pay for, into a taco shell you didn't create is worth 100% of what that gets sold for?"

The sale price of the taco will be more than the wage paid and more than the price of the beef, or else he makes no profit.

Now you've got it. But it's worse than you have realized yet. He will starve to death if he makes no profit. So he will not be employing the labourer, who will also starve to death.

So, in fact, you're right about the $7 when factoring material costs. The taco maker isn't worth all $7 of that taco, but the capitalist still isn't worth any of it.

Then you've destroyed the job, and doomed both the owner and the employee to starve.

Sounds like Communism, alright. That's what they do.

[Gary Childress]

"So...you think cheese is free, meat is free, trucks are free, advertising is free, innovation is free, social taxation is free, medical and retirement programs are free...None of them can be counted into the price of the taco. But putting ingredients you didn't buy, in a truck you don't own, with marketing you didn't pay for, into a taco shell you didn't create is worth 100% of what that gets sold for?"

The sale price of the taco will be more than the wage paid and more than the price of the beef, or else he makes no profit.

Now you've got it. But it's worse than you have realized yet. He will starve to death if he makes no profit. So he will not be employing the labourer, who will also starve to death.

So, in fact, you're right about the $7 when factoring material costs. The taco maker isn't worth all $7 of that taco, but the capitalist still isn't worth any of it.

Then you've destroyed the job, and doomed both the owner and the employee to starve.

Sounds like Communism, alright. That's what they do.

Yes, without $400 billion a year Elon Musk would die of starvation. Don't lose too much sleep over Elon trading some of his billions in income to give his employees higher wages.

[Immanuel Can]

The sale price of the taco will be more than the wage paid and more than the price of the beef, or else he makes no profit.

Now you've got it. But it's worse than you have realized yet. He will starve to death if he makes no profit. So he will not be employing the labourer, who will also starve to death.

So, in fact, you're right about the $7 when factoring material costs. The taco maker isn't worth all $7 of that taco, but the capitalist still isn't worth any of it.

Then you've destroyed the job, and doomed both the owner and the employee to starve.

Sounds like Communism, alright. That's what they do.

Yes, without $400 billion a year Elon Musk...

Envy, again.

It's fascinating to me how you so quickly turn from moral introspection to covetousness, and still think yourself virtuous for doing it, it seems.

[Gary Childress]

Now you've got it. But it's worse than you have realized yet. He will starve to death if he makes no profit. So he will not be employing the labourer, who will also starve to death.

Then you've destroyed the job, and doomed both the owner and the employee to starve.

Sounds like Communism, alright. That's what they do.

Yes, without $400 billion a year Elon Musk...

Envy, again.

It's fascinating to me how you so quickly turn from moral introspection to covetousness, and still think yourself virtuous for doing it, it seems.

I don't understand why you rush to the defense of the uber-wealthy at the expense of all the poor in the world. I really don't. It doesn't sound Christian to me. But I guess since you know what "true" Christianity is, you must be right. Maybe when Jesus said to "render to Caesar what is Caesar's," he meant that people should give their money to the wealthy? Would that be an accurate interpretation, Saint IC?

[Gary Childress]

Of course, the Bible noticeably doesn't denounce slavery or genocide either.

[Gary Childress]

Christians must be the lowest common denominator when it comes to common sense. God, they are stupid.

[Gary Childress]

Actually, I shouldn't characterize all Christians according to the way IC thinks. I apologize. Yes. There are actually Christians who are good people. I will concede that.

[Immanuel Can]

Yes, without $400 billion a year Elon Musk...

Envy, again.

It's fascinating to me how you so quickly turn from moral introspection to covetousness, and still think yourself virtuous for doing it, it seems.

I don't understand why you rush to the defense of the uber-wealthy

Show where I have ever done anything of the kind. You'll find I never have.

But I have pointed out that Elon is responsible for Elon, and Gary for Gary. Remember it. Because when you stand before God, he won't ask you what Elon did. He'll ask you what you did. And if you think greed and spite are any better when they're in you or me than they are in Elon, then you don't know how justice reckons.

At the end of the day, the difference between us and Elon is a bunch of zeros.

[Gary Childress]

Envy, again.

It's fascinating to me how you so quickly turn from moral introspection to covetousness, and still think yourself virtuous for doing it, it seems.

I don't understand why you rush to the defense of the uber-wealthy

Show where I have ever done anything of the kind. You'll find I never have.

But I have pointed out that Elon is responsible for Elon, and Gary for Gary. Remember it. Because when you stand before God, he won't ask you what Elon did. He'll ask you what you did. And if you think greed and spite are any better when they're in you or me than they are in Elon, then you don't know how justice reckons.

At the end of the day, the difference between us and Elon is a bunch of zeros.

Why would God have any desire for Elon Musk to go to Heaven? Why would God care if the less fortunate envy the uber-wealthy? I mean, would God punish a homeless person for envying someone eating at a nice buffet? What's it to God if a homeless person envies those who aren't homeless? What's it to God if I envy someone who has so much money that they are effectively above the law? Are you sure God cares whether or not someone envies Elon Musk? I mean, it's not like anyone is harming Elon Musk just by envying him?

That just seems like a really stupid belief if that's what Christians believe. I think some Christians have shit for brains, but that's just me I guess. Maybe God disagrees. I mean, I think genocide and war crimes are wrong. Maybe God doesn't think so. If that's the case, then I see no reason to believe God is benevolent and worthy of worship. Should we worship demons too?

[Immanuel Can]

I don't understand why you rush to the defense of the uber-wealthy

Show where I have ever done anything of the kind. You'll find I never have.

But I have pointed out that Elon is responsible for Elon, and Gary for Gary. Remember it. Because when you stand before God, he won't ask you what Elon did. He'll ask you what you did. And if you think greed and spite are any better when they're in you or me than they are in Elon, then you don't know how justice reckons.

At the end of the day, the difference between us and Elon is a bunch of zeros.

Why would God have any desire for Elon Musk to go to Heaven?

Who said I did? It's up to the Judge, not me.

Why would God care if the less fortunate envy the uber-wealthy?

Because God forbids covetousness. It's a spiteful, ungrateful, ugly kind of disposition. Why would God ever approve it?

God gives each man opportunities and advantages. You have more than some, and less than others. What's important to your relationship with God is not somebody else's "hand of cards": it's how you play your own. A covetous man spends all his time hating people who have more than he has, and being totally ungrateful for and indifferent to all that he, himself, has been given. He doesn't take his own opportunities, and just envies those that others have. That's pretty ugly.

[Gary Childress]

Show where I have ever done anything of the kind. You'll find I never have.

But I have pointed out that Elon is responsible for Elon, and Gary for Gary. Remember it. Because when you stand before God, he won't ask you what Elon did. He'll ask you what you did. And if you think greed and spite are any better when they're in you or me than they are in Elon, then you don't know how justice reckons.

At the end of the day, the difference between us and Elon is a bunch of zeros.

Why would God have any desire for Elon Musk to go to Heaven?

Who said I did? It's up to the Judge, not me.

Why would God care if the less fortunate envy the uber-wealthy?

Because God forbids covetousness. It's a spiteful, ungrateful, ugly kind of disposition. Why would God ever approve it?

God gives each man opportunities and advantages. You have more than some, and less than others. What's important to your relationship with God is not somebody else's "hand of cards": it's how you play your own. A covetous man spends all his time hating people who have more than he has, and being totally ungrateful for and indifferent to all that he, himself, has been given. He doesn't take his own opportunities, and just envies those that others have. That's pretty ugly.

I see. Would believing that a dictator has too much power be "envy" of a dictator? So, for example, if someone became dictator of Canada, it would just be you acting "ugly" and "covetous" to advocate for his removal?

[Immanuel Can]

Would believing that a dictator has too much power be "envy" of a dictator?

"Believing" isn't the problem. Being envious, covetous, ungrateful and greedy is.