• Kecessa
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    15
    ·
    6 months ago

    You’re ignoring that what you output from your work needs to be… Outputted? So the issue is that you make less than you deserve for the amount of work that you do… If you make 25$/h and it wealth got redistributed so you would make 100$/h it doesn’t mean you could work 10h instead of 40h, your employer would still need you to 40h (or close to it, maybe you would be motivated by the increase in salary and work faster but that’s speculations) to achieve the same result.

    If unemployment was at 75% and wealth redistribution happened to quadruple salaries then we could say “Instead of having 25% of the population working 40h/week at 25$/h, we’ll have 100% of the population working 10h/week at 100$/h so in the end the people that are working already will be making the same annual salary” but that’s not the case.

    • trashgirlfriend@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      31
      ·
      6 months ago

      Except a lot of people’s work output is kinda fucking pointless.

      If we managed the way we worked better and didn’t have the mindset of work for works sake/for the sake of the rich, we could be working a lot less.

      • Kecessa
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        6 months ago

        I think Lemmy’s vision of productivity is skewed by the fact that there’s a lot of office workers on here…

        • Almrond@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          6 months ago

          I work in a grocery store, and while I would still need to be in about 25-30 hours a week to ensure product is on the shelves a massive amount of my time at work is useless facing and looking busy after the first few hours of real work restocking. If I was paid fairly I could come in for about 3 hours every day and have everything that needed done done without spinning on a thumb all day just to barely make rent.

      • Kecessa
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        6 months ago

        You’re talking about something else entirely.

        Rich people disappear, wealth is redistributed, somehow you guys think that building a house will suddenly take less work hours than it does at the moment? No it won’t, construction workers will be paid more to work just as many hours building that house, they won’t suddenly work 20h/week.

        • nickwitha_k (he/him)@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          6 months ago

          Rich people disappear, wealth is redistributed, somehow you guys think that building a house will suddenly take less work hours than it does at the moment? No it won’t, construction workers will be paid more to work just as many hours building that house, they won’t suddenly work 20h/week.

          Probably a bad example. The wealthy are the cause of fewer houses being built than are needed to maintain the surplus allowing reasonable pricing in the market. And it is being done primarily to extract more money from people without actually producing anything. So, that house would actually get built and probably to better standards than are currently seen with the efforts to maximize profit.

          • Kecessa
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            Holy fuck! That’s not the fucking point! The time to end up with a finished product is the fucking same no matter how much people are getting paid! Your screws and nails don’t go in any faster! You can’t type faster than your fastest typing speed! You can’t call more than one client at a time! You’re just paid more but the work isn’t accomplished faster!

            You’re so blinded by rich people that you’re unable to analyze the rest of the issue!

            • oo1@lemmings.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              6 months ago

              So paying higer profit share or wage to construction wokers won’t encouage more people to spend more time building stuff?

              Did no one tell you about how competetive markets work? supernormal profits get bid down by market entry.

              banks and oligopolistic top tier construction companies, and landowners don’t want more construction, or entry into the market.

              by your logic we should just offer people slave contracts and they’d opt in.

              • Kecessa
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                6 months ago

                Unemployment isn’t that high, people who don’t work at the moment don’t do so out of choice (because clearly unemployment isn’t the best way to pay rent!) and we’re talking about redistribution of wealth in all sectors, not just that one sector, so all wages would increase. You don’t end up with more workers suddenly wanting to work construction (which are already well paid jobs in most locations which doesn’t seem to help recruitment!), you still have the same unemployment rate and the same labor needs, you just redistributed wages in a more sensible way.

                Hell, demand would probably increase in most sectors due to the general population having more money to spend instead of it being in the hands of so few people, that means more people required to make stuff without having more people to take those jobs!

                  • Kecessa
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    6 months ago

                    Oh so you think people would suddenly have money and not want to buy the stuff they never had access to?

            • nickwitha_k (he/him)@lemmy.sdf.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              6 months ago

              Holy fuck! That’s not the fucking point! The time to end up with a finished product is the fucking same no matter how much people are getting paid! Your screws and nails don’t go in any faster! You can’t type faster than your fastest typing speed! You can’t call more than one client at a time! You’re just paid more but the work isn’t accomplished faster!

              That’s really not correct. Like, what you are saying here:

              Your screws and nails don’t go in any faster!

              is literally contradictory to reality.

              Automation and technological advances literally make work more productive. A carpenter getting a share of the value of their labor that is both keeping pace with inflation and productivity would mean that they can invest in newer tools and equipment that can allow them to accomplish more in a safer manner in a shorter time. They could, for example, purchase a cordless framing nailer and spare batteries, eliminating the need to setup a workplace generator and pneumatic compressor, which would need to be moved periodically as they work. It also eliminates the hose as a potential workplace tripping hazard. Assistive robotic exoskeletons increase carry capacity while reducing strain on joints, reducing likelihood of injury while increasing efficiency.

              You can’t type faster than your fastest typing speed!

              But you can automate repetitive tasks, allowing more to be done in the same amount of time. More resources allow one to invest in their own or others’ knowledge to accomplish that.

              You can’t call more than one client at a time!

              This is true. But how many calls or meetings really are needed and can’t be sorted via email or Slack?

              You’re so blinded by rich people that you’re unable to analyze the rest of the issue!

              I think that you may be projecting a bit here. I’m just tired of the bleeding of the working class that has been actively in progress in the West for the last half century at least. I’m happy to dig into the slews of data showing how and why people are worse off than their ancestors and where that money has been going (spoiler: the wealthy have been hoarding it and continue to insatiably claw back more via price gouging and wage theft).

              • Kecessa
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                6 months ago

                Man, you truly have no idea how construction works.

                I’m done, goodbye.

    • notsofunnycomment@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      A lot of the work we do is effectively to satisfy the (constantly changing and growing) desires or the wealthy (or let’s say, the desires of the people who employ wage workers).

      Simple example: labour productivity has grown with 70% since the 70s while real wages have stayed more or less the same. So that growth in output hasnt been going to workers. (The time that productivity increase could have freed up, is now used to produce stuff that the workers do not get to consume themselves).

      https://www.epi.org/productivity-pay-gap/

    • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      I’m not ignoring anything. Commodities trend towards being sold at their Value, and since Value comes from Labor and Natural Resources, Capitalists necessarily pay Workers less than the Value they create. Ie, if a Worker creates $500 in Value per day yet is paid 15 dollars an hour for their 10 hours, this means they have made $350 in Value purely for the Capitalist. With their 50 dollars in Value per Hour created, they cover their wages in a mere 3 hours, rather than 10. The excess 7 is “hidden” from the Worker, via calling the 15 dollars per hour a wage, despite it being purely for the Capitalist.

      A similar process can be seen in Feudalism, though it was more distinct. In Feudalism, serfs covered rent, then produced for themselves. They were able to clearly see what has been taken. Capitalism advanced on this concept to obscure exploitation through the idea of wages, yet still they take profit via paying Workers less than the Value they create.

      I recommend reading Wage Labor and Capital and following it up with Value, Price and Profit if you want further elaboration and proof of said concepts, and have a couple hours to spare.

      • Kecessa
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        6 months ago

        I’m talking about a separate issue! Even if rich people don’t exist anymore, something that takes 500h work hours to accomplish will still take 500h to accomplish, you won’t suddenly have to work less.

        • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          6 months ago

          You are not talking about a separate issue.

          Going off my example from earlier, the Workers would only need to work 3 hours to maintain their standard of living, the extra 7 hours are pocketed by the Capitalist for their enrichment alone.

          Removing the wealth siphons reduces the amount of necessary work, as if you only need 3 hours to cover yourself without a Capitalist involved, you only need to work 3 hours.

          Society overproduces vast amounts of goods and works far longer than necessary purely for Capitalist enrichment, not to cover themselves.