1.
Owners, often known as capitalists, are people or organizations that own the means of production, which include companies, factories, raw materials, and necessary machinery. These capitalists control a large portion of these priceless assets and deciding how best to use and distribute them in the market. Owners usually do not participate actively in the hands-on production of goods or services, but they do profit handsomely from the labor their employees contribute. Their primary sources of income and wealth are investments and ownership stakes in companies, giving them significant control over a range of business-related activities.
One well-known example of a capitalist is a Chief Executive Officer (CEO) who owns a sizable portion of a business. Due to their ownership share, this person not only controls the business’s operations but also gains financially from its success. Another example of a capitalist is a small-business owner or the owner of a nearby factory or retail store. This factory owner has control over the manufacturing process and the earnings that emerge from it, all the while profiting from the things that the people in that facility make and ultimately enjoying the fruits of their labor.
Workers, or employees as they are more often called, are people who exchange their labor for owners’ income or compensation. They do not own the means of production and usually do not get the profits made by the company, in contrast to capitalists. Their income is derived solely from their labor, not from investments or ownership stakes. As a result, decisions about working conditions, responsibilities, and compensation are frequently decided by owners or managers without consulting the employees.
Consider a factory worker who assembles goods for an hourly rate, for example. This employee lacks decision-making power within the company and has no ownership interest in the plant. Their financial status is directly impacted by the number of hours they work and the pay that is outlined in their employment contract. Their job is to do particular duties as directed by their managers or supervisors.
2.
The insightful words of Adam Smith highlight the fact that labor is the primary indicator of a good or service’s actual value in the market. He states that while money offers an easy and useful way to express value—what is commonly called the “nominal price”—the true and inherent value of any good is primarily determined by the labor required to produce it. In essence, it is the deliberate work and expertise required to turn raw materials—like a tree, for example—into priceless products like paper or exquisitely made furniture.
Smith argues that since it takes a lot of human labor to transform raw materials into completed goods that can be sold to customers, labor is what gives commodities their intrinsic value. He also stresses how labor is essential at every level of production, from the early phases of harvesting to the complex processes of manufacture and, finally, distribution. It would just not be able to create goods without this necessary component.
This definition suggests that work is, in fact, the foundation of any successful economy on a far larger scale. Commodities’ worth would go unrealized and unacknowledged without it since they wouldn’t be accessible in a commercial and useful form. This perspective on labor brings up important conversations concerning economic relationships, such as the significant value that employees add to the goods, they assist in producing and how this value is eventually distributed throughout society’s sectors.
In analyzing Smith’s perspective, we are urged to think on the crucial role of labor in molding not just goods but also the very fabric of economic exchanges and the social structures that result from them. Given that labor is a fundamental component of any economy, it is imperative that workers receive just compensation and treatment for their efforts, which are what spur productivity and creativity.
3.
The claim made in Reading 4.4 that class is not an identity refutes the widespread belief that class can be discussed in identity politics in the same way that race or gender can. This viewpoint is interesting because it highlights how class is structural, not a personal identity like color or gender, which is fundamentally different. While social standing and personal experiences are frequently determined by race and gender, class is primarily determined by one’s place in the economic system of production. Rather than being a fundamental characteristic or identity, class is about a person’s material relationship to income, labor, and capital.
Class is a social relationship that is dynamic and influenced by economic pressures, in contrast to identities based on race or gender, which are determined by birth. As a result, it becomes less of a set “identity” and more of a place within a bigger exploitative structure. Workers and capitalists have conflicting interests because of their respective economic positions; they are not just two separate identities. When class is viewed structurally, it highlights the ways in which capitalism systematically separates people into groups with different economic interests and the ways in which these divisions affect those groups’ access to power and resources.
Having said that, class has a significant impact on how individuals see and manage their lives even though it may not be an identity in the conventional sense. When class, race, gender, and other identities come together, oppression of marginalized people is exacerbated. For instance, a Black woman working in a low-paying job faces discrimination on the basis of both race and gender, but her status makes her more susceptible to financial exploitation. While understanding how it interacts with other types of oppression, class is better understood as a structural force rather than an identity, helping to clarify its position in larger systems of inequality.
4.
My understanding about the arguments made in Reading 4.4 that “class structures are built around a close form of dependency” is that there is a fundamental bond that exists between social classes within of an economy. The interdependence of the working class and the owning class is what defines this reliance. Though both classes are dependent on one another, there is an imbalance in the way that they rely on one another, with one class having greater power and influence over resources, output, and working conditions. The tight knit but unequal relationship that upholds class systems is defined by this imbalance.
The interdependent link between classes, whereby one class economic survival depends on the labor or resources owned by another, is highlighted by the “close form of dependency” discussed in Reading 4.4. The working class, for example, depends on the owning class for jobs and pay in order to survive in a capitalist society. Workers produce goods and services with the help of owners, who in turn pay them wages in appreciation for their labor. Because they lack autonomous resources like land or capital, workers cannot exist without access to these salaries.
On the other hand, in order to make money, the owning class depends on the working class. Owners are unable to make money, expand their enterprises, or sell items without workers to create them. As a result, there exists a close link between the owning class and the working class due to their mutual need.
An example of this “close form of dependency” can be seen in the gig economy, which includes companies like Uber, DoorDash, and freelance platforms. These platforms are essential for gig workers to locate employment and make money. Without access to these platforms, a lot of workers would have trouble finding work, especially in places where traditional occupations are hard to come by. A vital source of income that enables many people to satisfy their basic requirements is gig employment. Though these businesses employ gig workers, they also depend on the availability of inexpensive, on-demand labor to deliver services to clients. Businesses like Uber or DoorDash could not make money if they did not have employees to drive cars, deliver meals, or perform other activities.
In conclusion, the arguments in Reading 4.4 that “class structures are built around a close form of dependency” highlights the essential bond that exists between the various classes within an economy.
