undefined | Better HN

0 pointsonethought2y ago0 comments

It’s not a meme. You do something that is sold for X and you are paid X-Y. y is your surplus value.

True you possibly couldn’t get that y on your own. But someone got it, and it wasn’t you.

0 comments

> You do something that is sold for X and you are paid X-Y.

If my neighbor wants a new fence (the Y), offers me $50 to dig a hole (the X-Y) to put a fence pole in.

I dig a hole, i get $50. He gets closer to a fence. we have both profited, who is exploited?

Or if you want to go even more basic:

he wants a fence, he pays me $500 to build a fence, i build the fence and get $500. who is exploited?

Note these are real examples from real life that i deal with.

That’s not wage based labour. You are an owner/operator in that scenario, and you fully realised the value.

The value of the fence is X and you got X.

The value of the fence is different for different people.

For me it's $500, for my neighbour it's $5000 - because it stops rabbits from eating his garden and stray dogs or whatever.

If it's $5000 value to my neighbour, should I have charged more even though I would've accepted $500? Who would have been exploiting who then?

This is directly analogous to my employer as well, except replace "neighbour" with boss, and "fence" with code. It's still a voluntary trade.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse