You're viewing part of a thread.
Well, you are getting paid for your work, by someone who managed to get the business going, all hard things aside.
That's not Capitalism.
Can you please explain me than? Seems I was wrong all this time...
(Just in case you thought I had forgotten about you.)
If workers want to, that could increase their professional aptitude to be able to maintain or work with new machines, making them more valuable and increasing their wages. If you are valuable you and your manager understands this - It's in his self-interest to keep you on a workplace
In objectivism, you don't encroach on others right to live, so the last one is obscure
You have never actually worked for a living, have you?
I am doing it right now and changed to jobs, until I found a great place. I am living with my fiance rn in a flat, without parents. Before this, I changed two jobs, I was It Specialist(anykey) in Vet clinic and a packer at a pharmacy. Both places I didn't like and now I am a system administrator at insurance company. I like what I am doing and people I work with.
Another example is my father, he changed his job less than a month ago. He found a better job, where they paying him ~30% more for less work. He wasn't changing his workplace for 10 years, but he was getting more and more duties for the same payment. So I don't understand why people complain about labour. If you are not forced to work under a threat of death, you can always leave. It's your choice to stay.
It Specialist
Do tell - who paid for you to acquire the know-how that made you qualified for this role, eh? What's the ROI for the people that made this expensive investment in your education?
my father
Oh yes... do bring more people into this conversation that completely bucked "rational self-interest" for your sake - I'm sure this will go really well for your argument.
In my case government paid for the fisrt half and the other half is student loan I am paying rn. I pay the bank and government with taxes.
I am providing examples of this happening in my life, that's why I know this is real for a fact. I have done this and saw people do this. Why wouldn't it go well for my argumentation?
Should you believe in this? Probably no, at least I wouldn't. You have your own examples and you believe in them more, than some stranger on the internet(great job, that's how you should behave)
In my case government paid for the fisrt half
Ooooh... the ghost of Ayn Rand is bitterly disappointed in you.
And why would her ghost be disappointed in me? In her philosophy government exists and continue to exist. It would take a lot of time to reform. I am seeing with my own eyes, that without "government approved" education I can't get work in my country /:
Capitalism isn't wage labor, it's a specific mode of production by which individual Capitalists buy and sell Capital, then pay Workers wage labor to use said Capital to create commodities.
If the entity is Worker Owned, it's Socialist, as Capitalism requires Capitalists.
In other words, worker is getting paid for creating goods/services for entity owner(capitalist in our case)?
If the entity owner is the body of Workers collectively, it's Socialist.
Yeah, but my previous take was about capitalism, so did I understand it right?
How much did you pay your mother for having you?
Firstly, that's rude. Secondly, the only possible way I can pay her back is give someone else another life.
No, it isn't.
Did you or did you not pay your mother for all the services she has rendered to you?
You can't even apply Rand's objectivist bullshittery to your own existence - yet here you are pretending you can apply it everywhere else.
Put up or shut up.
If you read about Rand's philosophy, it is not a sacrifice to do something for the loved ones for free. Their happiness is your happiness, so it's in your interest to make them happy. My mother never asked me to pay her back. I payback to foreigners and friends for their services. I don't ask people to do something for me free, nor do something to others for free.
not a sacrifice to do something for the loved ones for free
Good job proving what an irredeemable hypocrite Rand really was. So far, that's the only substantial thing you've managed to accomplish.
She wasn't a hypocrite, she would also do everything for her loved ones and wouldn't call it a sacrifice
she would also do everything for her loved ones
Soooo... no "rational self-interest" from Ayn Rand? It just exists as fantasy in her silly little books?
You don't say.
If you would read what she was writing, she said, that it is in her self-interest to do this. If you can't leave without this person, than it's okay to risk your life for him. It is in your self-interest to do it, in other way, you will not be living
