>>14568
I dont think labor means what you think it means. labor is not an item, it cannot be bought and sold, and it cannot be "robbed". people can be bought and sold, and stolen for that matter given slavery is a thing. labor is a product of cost benefit analysis made by people. it does not simply "exist" devoid of any system. The less benefit you have for labor the less labor you get. simple as that. paying someone for their labor is not robbery. its called a contract, its called a trade. an employer gives you a sum of money that you can use on living costs and extra luxury items in turn for time and work (i.e. labor)
>It was the socialist movements of the late 19th and early 20th century that made the conditions of Industrialization livable for the people who's backs it was built on; not the captains of industry (slave drivers) but the people. And again, an empty factory doesn't do you any favors. Labor. All labor.
never said I was against socialism, I in fact think a healthy balance of socialism and capitalism is what a country needs to function properly.
Capitalism is by no means a perfect system and when gone unchecked can lead to some disastrous things like child workers, heavy government corruption, and exploitative labor practices. However, when in check and working under guidance it can grow a nation into a superpower and bring standards of living up exponentially. you seem to think that your internet connection and computer would have come about through
>pure labor uncorrupted by money
Labor is not corrupted through money and it is not stolen through money. labor is fueled by money. money is what drives labor. labor does not "exist" independent of any system, it in fact requires at least one person to exist. the most a person in a tribal system will exert is the labor required to live and to protect its offspring. the living and continued protection of offspring is the incentive for that labor. The incentive of making better tools to sow the field of wheat is not purely labor for labors own sake. the incentive of making the tools is less labor later for more pay out, the crops being the pay. the previous two examples are about as far as you get without a system of commerce. labor without money is purely self interested and does little to push forward the common good going only so far as to serve the intrest of the one who exerts it. how do you get people to exert labor on a project that doesn't directly ensure their continued existence and or directly benefit them through labor alone? the answer is you pay them. they do work that doesn't directly/inherently benefit them, but they still get benefit after the fact.
The pyramids were not built by slaves. they were built by paid labor. groups of workers were told that if they worked on the monuments that they would compensated for it, and the harder they worked than the others the more they would get paid. why did workers build giant monuments of steel in concrete in new york? I can tell ya it wasn't for the labor. it wasn't for their own sense of accomplishment. It was because the job paid well. why do people work in call centers? I can tell ya it aint for the fun of it. no, its cause they get paid to do it. Why are there paramedics? I can tell you it isnt for the fun of it. Its because people get paid to do a job. without commerce, people do not work for the common good beyond what benifits themselves
Did you even go to kindergarten cause you seem to be lacking some fundamental aspects of humanity here let alone the very fundamentals of economic theory. Its almost as if your an ignorant moron that doesn't understand how backwards and nonsensical his own position is.
>And again, an empty factory doesn't do you any favors. Labor. All labor
The initial birth of industry and the exploitative nature of its original leaders does nothing to actually refute capitalism, seeing as capitalism has been around for mush longer than any sort of industry whatsoever. The examples youve pointed out are industry and capitalism run amuck, not examples of why capitalism and or industry is wrong as a whole, you've pointed out the worst state of a system as a disparagement of the system as a whole, an you think its clever because you read it in a book written a hundred years ago. Labor is not stolen, people are. you cannot steal labor, labor is a service, not an object. what youre talking about isnt people stealing labor, its people stealing other peoples will. go ahead, kepp trying to straw man, that will make your argument so much more valid.