- What is the distinction that Reading 4.3 makes between owners and employees? Give an example of each.
The distinction from the reading indicates that Owners are defined as the Wealth Class, while Employees belong to the Laboring Class. The Wealth Class does not rely on physical labor to generate wealth; instead, they depend on the Laboring Class to create production, which serves the demand for what consumers are willing to buy.
When laborers create mass production for organizations, these businesses rely on their efforts to build surplus upon surplus. In contrast, employees primarily live off wages, salaries, and fees from the work they invest through labor, meaning there is no income unless they physically commit to earning it.
For instance, consider a business like JPMorgan Chase, which holds all the monetary interests of the public. The owners do not need to work there to ensure profits continue to accrue; they do not need to be visible within this infrastructure to maintain profit. Executives, shareholders, and major investors profit from the institution’s success without directly performing frontline labor.
On the other hand, a bank teller performs customer service, handles transactions, and assists with banking needs, but they do not share in the profits generated by the bank. Instead, they receive a fixed wage for their work. Laborers must clock in for their allotted time, earning a suggested salary based on their experience and education. However, these wages are often low enough to maintain high profits for the bank, ensuring substantial returns for the owners.
If a laborer cannot work any longer, they will face a loss of income, which could lead to homelessness and other dire consequences.
- How do you understand the quote by Adam Smith on pg. 28? What is it saying about labor?
wealthy. . T
How I interpret Adam Smith’s quote hints that the original meaning of true labor is energy exchange. It is not leveraged by money, which is merely a tool with no inherent value. Society has been conditioned to believe that capitalism must endure for its own survival. In truth, without labor, there would be no need for capitalism. Smith’s quote argues that labor is the foundation of value. Before the utilization of minerals( Gold and Silver) for monetary trade to purchase goods, the true cost of anything was measured by the amount of work (labor) required to produce it.
The reliance of laborers on the wealth of the upper class illustrates the issue of wealth inequality, which refers to the uneven distribution of wealth in our society. An extremely small group of people owns a significant amount of the world’s commodities. Statistically speaking, less than 1 percent of the population controls the majority of the market. If this extreme imbalance continues, it can further harm those in poverty and also negatively affect the wealthy, as their fates are intrinsically intertwined. As the poverty level rises, due to a lack of surplus produced by consumers, it will lead to potential economic collapse.
- What are your thoughts on the main argument of Reading 4.4 that class is NOT an identity?
My thoughts are that liberals tend to claim that social class intertwines with the same identities we use through race and gender. This is a mistaken attempt to display the discrepancies that arise in social class, as they do not carry the same distinctions. I understand that liberals aim to address the injustices seen in monetary disparities among specific populations and how these issues affect genders through acts of sexism and racism.
Social class, particularly the division between labor and capital, does have a connection to these societal dilemmas. However, you cannot use identity to distinguish social class because it is fluid and can change depending on the dynamics between capitalists and laborers. For example, if no one decided to engage in work, there would be no capitalists.
Identity is a fixed aspect related to one’s pigmentation or other characteristics that society uses to assign distinctions, such as gender. In contrast, social class is a dynamic element of identity that refers to aspects of a person’s identity that can change over time due to personal choices, external circumstances, or evolving social conditions. Identity is generally considered to be a more static aspect; for instance, biological sex or racial identity can typically be perceived as fixed, even though they can be viewed differently through cultural or social lenses.
- 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 close form of dependency is when one cannot live without the other, much like the conditioned relationship between the capitalist and the laborer. The capitalist relies on the laborers to maintain the profits that their organization depends on for surplus, allowing them the comforts of life without indulging in hard labor. In turn, the laborer relies on the capitalist to sustain their ability to fulfill their consumer needs, which include paying for rent, providing for their family, funding college, and affording proper shelter. Without capitalism, laborers would have no occupations to pursue in their quest for the American Dream, which promises that if they work extremely hard, they will be greatly rewarded. I often reflect on this reward in relation to my parents, who were self-proprietors. I understood the message that the capitalist indoctrinate that “hard work”, is the pursuit of the so-called “land of milk and honey” ultimately resulted in their deaths. An example of this relationship is the clothing manufacturer, who acts as the capitalist and relies on laborers to design, sew, and produce clothing for profit. The laborers, or factory workers, depend on the clothing manufacturer to provide them with jobs and paychecks/ wages.
Posted in Discussion Board 4.2
