Q #1: To simply state the difference between owner and employee is that the owner execute zero labor while extracting profit from their employees labor and the employee is the one engaged in wage labor.

Q #2: The pure cost of anything ends up being the sum of the total labor infused into it and that is different from the monetary price which is subject to the necessity of profit for the only entity.

Q #3: I would say that it is practical to agree that class is more than identity. Capitalism surrounds everything and everyone and stems out from that point.

Q #4: Whoever is in government, or is in the ruling class, depend on the monetary gain of the owning class in order to survive. This translates two little to nothing being done to control their power. For instance, in honor of a property who makes the decision to let go of it or to renovate their property. Selling a building includes its own incentives for a high monetary gain with cities frequently prolonging developers’ assistance.

1. Owners, capitalists, or wealthy people are those who own the means of production. They live off the profits of their investment produced by employees who sell their labor for a wage. Owners are those individuals or families that live primarily off investments such as stocks, bonds, rents, mineral royalties, and other property income. At the same time, the employees seek to be financially stable through wages. The distinction here is that owners produce zero labor but enjoy the profit while the employee produces the labor but gets a salary lower than the labor they put in.
2. According to Smith, without labor, there is no value in wages and salaries. Employees are the actual value of companies. Employees’ labor is what makes companies gain profit, and since labor is the real value of all commodities, employees’ contributions to companies are what make companies and the capitalist rich.
3. Class is definitely not an identity. Class refers to our socio-economic status in society in terms of wealth, education, and income accumulated or generated over time. I say class is not an identity because some people can force their way up the ladder into the upper-middle classes even though they were born by lower-class parents.
4. Here, both the employers and employees depend on each other to keep on existing. The capitalist needs workers to produce goods and services to increase productivity and profits. In contrast, the employees need jobs and wages to keep up with their daily expenses, bills, and families.

1- The critical difference between the employee and the owner is that the employee is committed to paid work, while the masters do not generally work and extracts benefit from their colleagues’ work. 

2- The reading 4.3 emphasized a passage from Adam Smith, one of capitalism’s foundational thinkers, Labor is the only final and genuine criteria by which the worth of all things can be measured and compared at all times and locations.” It is their true price currency is merely their conventional price it is clear from this remark that money is not the true worth of a thing because work is ultimately the true criterion to evaluate that value. In other words, because of the effort and time they devote to completing the task, labor plays a significant role in regulating the value of products. As a result, employment plays a significant role in bolstering company profits. 

3- My response to reading 4.4’s primary point is that class is a financial background, not an identity. Although the class is a social-economic status, being categorized as upper, intermediate, or poorer based on a variety of variables, including ownership, property, reputation, and power. However, identification merely denotes gender, ethnicity, and other factors. 

4- As per the reading, the theory of class structure is predicated on an especially close type of interdependence, and the connection among class struggle appears to be fundamentally opposed. The exploiter is one, while the exploited is another. Workers sell their labor and time to investors in order to generate excess profits. The capitalist is the controller of the equipment, as well as the worker, is a broken piece of equipment that must be repaired. Workers, on the other hand, are reliant on capitalists to generate surplus value. 

What is in the distinction that Reading 4.3 makes between owners and employees? Give an example of each. 

• According to the reading Wealth and Want in the United States, owners are those individuals or families that live mostly off investments such as, stocks, bonds, rents, mineral royalties, and other property income. For one to be considered an owner then, most live out off the work of others. Owners, according to the reading refer to both the fabulously wealthy stockholders of giant corporations and the struggling proprietors of small stores. However, the author makes it clear that struggling proprietors of small victims cannot or should not be considered as members of the corporate owning clas, as they are also victims of big business. 
• Employees have a greater range, it includes professionals and managers, people that would be considered as upper-middle and middle class, these could be compared to the manager of a plantation, his work was to extract more value-producing performance out of the enslaved people. In that case, the employees are the ones creating the wealth for the master. 

How do you understand the quote by Adam Smith on pg 28? what is it saying about labor?

• I believe Adam Smith was making clear that in other for capitalism to be successful, labor is a key part.  This, because he is saying that what makes the money, what adds the value to what the owner sells or owns is the labor.  The reading gives a great example of this: “what transforms a tree into a profitable commodity such as paper or furniture is the labor that goes into harvesting the timber, cutting the lumber and manufacturing, shipping, advertising, and selling the finished product”. If an owner has a tree plantation, but there is no labor into harvesting it and everything that needs to happen for that tree to become a product others can buy at the store, the owner has nothing more than a land full of trees.  It is an asset, it has value, but what makes it a money machine is the labor of the people that work for the owner, it is the workers the ones producing the money, while the owner profits it. 

1. What are your thoughts on the main argument of Reading 4.4 that class is NOT an identity? I believe the reading wants to argue that class is more or that goes deeper than another identity because class referst o an entire structure that imposes very specific logics of action on people in society.  The Marxist idea of: “what you have determines what your get”, place things on perspective to me.  If I think class from this perspective, class then becomes an intersection where all types of identities regardless sex, gender or “race”, ended up in two big piles: Owners and Workers.  You either own the means of production or you ended up (no matter how much you make) selling your labor in order to survive.  And contrary to for example, my social identities don’t depend necessarily on others to be, I do not depend on white people’s identities to be a latinx person, when talking about class there is an interdependence within capitalist and workers where workers are dependent on a given capitalist or firm for a job and that same capitalist depend on a worker and their ongoing exploitation in order to maintain their position as owners. So class, in my opinion is deeper than an identity it is more complex, but it can also be the point of encounter for people to realize the means for our liberation. “We can’t solve our problems unless there is a radical redistribution of economic and political power” (MLK). 
2. How do you understand the argument Reading 4.4. makes when stating that “class structures are built around a close form of dependency”? What is this close form of dependency, and can you think of an example? The reading -brilliantly I must add- argues on the dependency owners and workers have.  The author argues that to be a worker means, necessarily, to be dependent on a given capitalist or firm for a job… and that to be a capitalist means to be engaged in the ongoing exploitation of particular workers in order to maintain that position”. Furthermore, the author states that this relationship means that the worker will always and everywhere will be in a position of having their interest at least threatened by the capitalist, and the capitalist will find themselves coming to the table of negotiation to meet the workers needs because it is the worker who creates the profit they make.  And that dependency goes beyond capitalist and workers, government and society as a whole also depends on the capitalist to keep producing and making profit, capitalist can choose not to produce or invest if they don’t think profits will be hight enough.  This makes according to the reading, that all of society to be compelled to ensure that their profitability stays high enouf to keep them producing, no matter the cost of the rest of society. An example of this dependency can be seen with Amazon for example.  How much profit Amazon has been creating for the last four years alone? That profit would not be possible without the workers that goes from the delivery person, to the people in the warehouse, the managers, the IT people who run their apps and other platforms, the postal office, etc.  Resently workers of Amazon stand up against some policies withing the institution, that put Amazon on a very difficult position, bringing the owner to the table of conversation, showing what the reading states about that power workers can have over the owner, because the capitalist’s profits highly depends on them.  That relationship that takes place with the rest of society, that feels compelled to make sure Amazon keeps making profit to ensure economical stability, can be seen in the tax reform passed by Trump Administration.  Where Amazon paid $0 in taxes, making more profit than ever, all under the assumption that Amazon will create more warehouse and so more jobs. 

1. What is the distinction that Reading 4.3 makes between owners and employees? Give an example of each.

The distinction that separates owners from employees is the overall wealth. Owners create their wealth in various aspects and being a part of the owning class comes from maintaining large wealth, such as investments, including providing job opportunities for employees. Therefore those areas must be flourishing through others in order to see financial growth. However, employees are financially stable through the hours or salaries they work for, not necessarily the other way around. Employees receive payment from owners, which is clearly the difference, both parties need each other in a sense but one party is receiving less income based on dynamics and classes, employees. 

2. How do you understand the quote by Adam Smith on pg. 28? What is it saying about labor?

Smith referenced that there are many aspects that go into a flourishing business and how the labor is executed through various processes. Labor only comes from employees, therefore, if it wasn’t for employees’ constant contribution, there wouldn’t be much wealth for the higher class. The money that goes towards these contributions is less valued compared to profits, whereas you would think the individuals doing the hard work are receiving what they deserve, however this is not the case. 

3. What are your thoughts on the main argument of Reading 4.4 that class is NOT an identity? 

Class can be considered as an identity even though it shouldn’t be. Class does not determine any status thus to time and changes, which is why categorized class shouldnt be recognized as an overall representation of an individual. Although, circumstances, along with other factors are relative to class, I truthfully believe class does not identify with identity. 

4. How do you understand the argument Reading 4.4. makes when stating that “class structures are built around a close form of dependency”? What is this close form of dependency, and can you think of an example?

This close form of dependency when stating class structures are built around human beings needing one another regardless of the agenda to maintain their personal lifestyle. For example, Target is a huge corporation with a large number of employees. An individual may have bills, kids, or expenses to pay for that’s why those employees maintain their job, just as a corporation needs workers for a functioning company. Both are trying to achieve a goal of some sort, even though class structures are separated, both have the same agenda in terms of needing one another. 

1.The Owning class lives of their investments, stocks, bonds, rents, royalties and other property incomes while the Employees work for a living, they live off their salaries, wages and fees.

2. Smith is saying that without labor there’s no value in wages and salary because labor is the true value of all commodities , basically the employee to me are the true value of a company and without them there is no company.

3.Class represents a person’s social standing in society. In this country a person can “rise above” the class they were born into with hard work and dedication, just because you were born poor doesn’t mean you have to be poor. I don’t believe it’s a person’s identity, it does not define who you are as a person

4.A close form of dependency can be between owner and worker, consumers. The owners depends on the workers to produce product to make money and the workers depends on the owners and consumers to earn money.

1. Owners make their money, their profit from the work done by their employees. The owners in a sense provide the jobs, but don’t do the job themselves. They survive from the profits they make from investments or businesses they own. They allow their money to “grow”, as their workers do what is needed in order for them to thrive. The employees are the ones that make the company or the businesses run, the ones that do the hard work, they live off their wages and not investments.
2. I think Adam Smith’s quote means, that labor is the real value, the real wealth. The labor is what creates the wealth, not the other way around.
3. I both agree and disagree that class is not an identity but that it can also be. It should not define who we are as a person, but it does in a way define where we end up in the “data” page.
4. I believe the whore means that both the owner and the employee are dependent on each other. The owner depends on the employee in order to continue growing their wealth. But they can’t do that if the employee does not show up for work or decides to strike. As the employee also depends on the owner to have a job. Much like an advertising company, if the art department of that company decides they will strike as a department together, it means the owner of the company will suffer as their clients will not receive the work they are expecting. Making the owner look bad and not make a profit from their workers.

1.Based on reading 4.3, the difference between bosses and employees is that owners are a part of the owning class and they live off investments that are a part of stocks, bonds, rents, mineral royalties, and other properties. Employees on the other hand live off what they make during their hours at work. According to the reading, “This shows that employees live mostly off wages, salaries, and fees.” In the reading, it states, “Workers’ wages represent only a portion of the wealth created by their labor. The average private-sector employee works two hours for herself or himself and six or more hours for the boss” this shows that the owners are making a lot more compared to what the employees are being paid. 

2. According to reading 4.3,  the quote by Adam Smith says, “labor … is alone the ultimate and real standard by which the value of all commodities can at all times and places be estimated and compared. It is their real price; money is their nominal price only.” This demonstrates that the labor performed by employees is the real price for services being rendered. Labor is the main reason why the majority of these companies are continuously growing and without labor companies would suffer a major downfall in their business. The money attached to the service or product is determined not so much on the labor that goes into it but rather on just a nominal value of the owner’s choice.

3. My thoughts on the main argument “ class is not an identity” is that class is not defining who you are as a person. You can be in the lower class group and have a very good education and frequent people from different classes. According to reading 4.4, “By treating class as just another identity — and holding that no identity plays any special role in structuring the distribution of power in society — they render invisible the ways that oppression is reproduced by the market. They may embrace the language of intersectionality, but their view of class makes it impossible to see how racial or gender hierarchies and class exploitation are intertwined.” This shows that being placed in social class affects people on more than just their financial aspect. It goes in oppression and injustice if just treating people in a manner they think should be fitting of a certain class and denying them opportunities. This is unfair and does not allow space for growth and mobility.

4.The quote  “class structures are built around a close form of dependency” shows that both capitalists and workers need each other in order to survive. The capitalist needs workers to be able to run the business just as workers need the capitalist to be able to make a living and pay bills. Although everyone identifies themselves in their own class it shows that regardless what social class you are in, people lean on one another  not to realize each other’s social group. As a restaurant worker in order for me to make money I have to provide my labor in making sure customers are satisfied with the products we provide which I trade for a paycheck. My boss as the owner of the restaurant needs employees to work for the purpose of keeping the store open and creating a profit. This process demonstrates a chain reaction where we constantly rely on each other despite our standard. 

1. What is the distinction that Reading 4.3 makes between owners and employees? Give an example of each.

According to the reading 4.3 owners are the wealthy people who own companies, buildings or any other property and they gain their living from the investment of those properties. While employees are the people who obtain their living from hard working. The income’s range distinguish between those two classes. Whereas owners represent both large companies and small business. Large companies are dominant which makes the small stores less valued resulting them to be vanished from the market. On the other hand, employees represent all working class including those who work in great position and strive to manage companies enhancing its income. Those workers could achieve a certain classification in terms of social class through their performance and gaining higher income which permit them to investing their income and thus having the opportunity to be classified as owners.

2. How do you understand the quote by Adam Smith on pg. 28? What is it saying about labor?

  The reading 4.3 highlighted the quote noted by Adam Smith, one of the founding theorists of capitalism, in 1776 “labor … is alone the ultimate and real standard by which the value of all commodities can at all times and places be estimated and compared. It is their real price; money is their nominal price only.” It is understandable from this quote that money is not the real value that of product because labor is eventually the real standard to determine that value. In other words, labor contribute extremely to regulate the value of products because of the effort and time they devoting to accomplish the work. Therefore, labor play a great role in strengthening the companies’ incomes and thus the economy. 

3. What are yur thoughts on the main argument of Reading 4.4 that class is NOT an identity?

According to the reading 4.4 socialist and liberals have different views for class. While socialist believe that class is a hierarchy of numbers determined by wealth/income, education, gender or/and race, socialist believes that class determined by two important forms which are capitals and working class. In the point of view od socialist class is more than another identity since capitalist are considered the power in the society and they forces every ones to be under their control because in their turn, they are depend on workers which could weaken their position as source of power.   

4. How do you understand the argument Reading 4.4 makes when stating that “class structures are built around a close form of dependency”? What is this close form of dependency, and can you think of an example?

the reading 4.4 illustrates the dependent relationship between the two classes (capitals and workers) stating, “class structures are built around a close form of dependency” (5). On my understanding this statement reveals the two structures of class including capitals and workers which are depending on each other to maintain their position and increases their interest. While capitals always need workers to promoting their profit, workers are always seeking to present a great performance to keep their jobs in a capitals’ companies which increases their interest to living. In other words, we could say that each structures represent the power of the other it is an integral relationship.

1. What is the distinction that Reading 4.3 makes between owners and employees? Give an example of each.

The distinction between owners and employees is that owners are who own wealth and their profit comes from the labor of other people to exploit the most of the value from employees’ surplus labor, but employees are who have to be forced to sell their labor and time for a living. According to the reading 4.3 the author Michael Parenti clearly exhibits the distinction between owner and employee. For example, Owners not only exploit the value from their employees, but also live mostly off investments, such as stocks, bonds, rents and mineral royalties. No wonder they can own most of the wealth in the society. Parenti explains that “The secret to great wealth is not to work hard but to have others work hard for you.” The panic part is the owner’s portion taken from employees which is not visible. End up the owners become wealthier. However, the employees are paid not the equal value they create, because the most portion value is taken to the owners. So the employees have to contribute more in exchange for a little compensation to support their living. 

2.How do you understand the quote by Adam Smith on pg. 28? What is it saying about labor?

Adam Smith explains that only the labor produced can determine the relative value of commodities in his labor quote. But money is the nominal price of commodities. I agree with his point of view about the value of labor. I am also grateful for his voice and opinion for the working classes, because most people are working for living, not because they lack knowledge, talents, dedication and experience, but because of the unequal social rule and opportunity.  Labor is the real price of commodities. The author gives an example about what transforms a tree into valuable furniture through workers’ designs it’s measurement, style and manufacturing, marketing and commodity promotion and so on and so forth. Without workers a tree could not transform by itself, and can’t create any profit to anyone except by the labor of workers. 

3. What are your thoughts on the main argument of Reading 4.4 that class is NOT an identity?

 My view to the main argument of reading 4.4 is that class refers to a socioeconomic status, also class is not an identity because class presents a social economic status, being classified in upper, middle or lower depends on many aspect factors, such as, ownership, property, reputation and power. but identity simply represents gender, race etc. 

4. How do you understand the argument Reading 4.4. makes when stating that “class structures are built around a close form of dependency”? What is this close form of dependency, and can you think of an example?

According to the reading, the concept of the class structure depends on a particularly close form of interdependence, and the relationship between capitalists and workers seemingly are opposed. One is the exploiter and the other is the exploited. Capitalists hire workers, and workers sell labor and time to create surplus value for capitalists. The capitalist is the controller and production tool of production resources, the capitalist is the master of the machine, and the worker is the part of the machine, which is replaced when it is broken. However, Capitalists also depend on workers to produce surplus value for them.