1. Parenti describes owners as those whose income “comes mostly from the labor of others”, whereas employees not only have to work, but compensation they receive for the value they generate (for owners) are vastly disproportionate. Parenti gives an example where the average private sector employee works 2 hours for themselves versus 6+ hours for the owner/employer.

An example of an owner would be a large corporation like Amazon. Amazon’s income is derived from the physical goods made from others, marketed and sold by employees, shipped by others, etc. Amazon itself doesn’t make or sell anything, yet receives the vast percent of income generated from said workers.
Employees would be the people who do the work of making the goods, marketing, selling, shipping/distributing said goods, but who receive a disproportionate wage from the value of the work done in order for Amazon to make their profits.

2. I’m likely off the mark, but I read that quote as Smith saying there’s no value in any commodity until the labor is accounted for. From the initial stage of making a thing, delivering the thing and getting someone to buy the thing, none of that is possible without labor and thus, labor is the first item of value.

3. I’m in agreement that class is not an identity. To compare class with sex or race, unchangeable traits people are born with, class is an ascribed status by whatever society has deemed it to be, it is a social construct.

4. To risk oversimplifying again, I interpret the idea of class structures are built around dependency as those who have the most can control those who don’t (or have less). If food and water, the bare minimum needed for basic survival, are resources owned by and/or distributed by a corporation or someone wealthy, they can control the flow, location and pricing of these to those that need it. Since everyone needs food and water, that dependency makes them vulnerable to the whims of the owners, who can then also control who or how many people to hire to grow the food, ship and distribute the food, now also creating a dependency for employment

keilany rivera

Reading 4.3 distinguishes between owners and employees based on their relationship to resources and labor. Owners control productive resources such as businesses, land, or capital, and they earn profit from these assets without needing to sell their own labor for wages. In contrast, employees do not own these resources, so they must sell their labor in exchange for wages. For example, a person who owns and operates a small bakery earns profit from the business itself, while a server working at a restaurant earns an hourly wage and may also receive tips.

Adam Smith suggests that labor is the true source of value in an economy. In other words, wealth is created through the work that people perform. From my understanding, he is arguing that workers generate value through their labor, but they do not receive the full value of what they produce, since part of it is captured elsewhere in the economic system.

The claim that “class is not an identity” means that class is not simply about how people see themselves or how they identify socially, like race, culture, or gender. Instead, class is based on structural economic positions within society. My interpretation is that class is defined by one’s role in the economic system, such as being an owner or a worker, rather than personal identity. This argument is convincing because it shows how class exists objectively within society, whether or not individuals consciously recognize it. However, identity still plays a role socially, since people’s perceptions of class can influence behavior and political views.

The idea that class structures are based on dependency means that different classes rely on one another in unequal but connected ways within the economy. Employees depend on employers for wages in order to survive, while employers depend on employees to produce goods and services that generate profit. For example, a warehouse worker depends on their job for income, while the company depends on that worker to keep operations running. Although both groups rely on each other, the relationship is not equal in terms of power and control.

1. Owners are people who make money of other people’s work, like company bosses or investors. Employees are the ones who physically do the work and getting paid. For example a McDonalds ceo would be the owner while the employee can be the one prepping the food.
2. It basically states that the real value of money comes from the work people invest into it, that it’s not just money but the effort and hard work that is needed from the workers to keep businesses going.
3. I agreed with it, social class doesn’t just have to be a label, it can also be about your role in this economy, how it affects you and your daily life.
4. It was more about dependency, how workers and bosses both need each other to make money or else it won’t work.

1. Reading 4.3 explains that the key distinction between owners and employees is based on who owns productive property and who must sell their labor to survive. Owners live primarily off investments and profits generated by the labor of others, while employees depend on wages and salaries. Owners make money because others work for them, whereas workers create value but receive only a portion of it as wages. An example of an owner is a person who has a company and receives income from profit shares. An example of an employee is a factory worker or a manager who is being paid a salary and doesn’t have any ownership of the business.
2. Adam Smith argues that labor is the “real price” of commodities, meaning that labor is what truly creates value. The reading underscores that without the effort, skill, and time of workers, there would be no products to sell. In most cases, the products of raw materials are transformed into useful goods through labor. In the case where the only inputs are money and no labor, there would be no value added. In essence, the quote highlights that although the employees do not capture the entire value of what they produce, they are the creators of the wealth.
3. Reading 4.4 argues that class is not simply an identity like race or gender, but a structural position in society. Unlike identity categories that are about social recognition, class determines people’s economic roles and interests. I interpret this standpoint as stating that class informs power and material survival beyond individual self-perception. While class can be internalized as an identity, it also structures access to resources and command over the means of production.
4. The reading explains that class structures are built around a close form of dependency because workers depend on capitalists for jobs, and capitalists depend on workers for profit. This indicates that for both parties involved, their relation is a matter of survival and economic reproduction. A case in point is a worker who requires a salary in order to pay rent and purchase food, while a business owner requires workers in order to make a profit. If workers strike, the owner loses money. This mutual but unequal dependency is what makes class different from other identities it involves direct economic interdependence and power.

1. In reading 4.3, Parenti describes a very bold line between owners and employees. Owners gain their large amounts of wealth off the backs of others, they get rich off of others’ labor. On the other hand, employees gain their wealth by putting the work into it, they live off of salaries and wages. But these wages represent only a fraction of the value that workers actually produce. This is a give and take relationship, but the benefits do not extend both ways. For example, minimum wage at Mcdonald’s ranges from $15 to $20 per hour, which means they bring in from 30k-50k for the year. But the people who share ownership of the company make upon millions.
2. On page 28, Adam Smith describes a quote where he talks about how labor is the real defining margin on placing value to things. Without labor, goods to buy simply wouldn’t exist. He puts a pin on the effort it takes to create an item, and that’s how it should be priced. It should be priced keeping in mind the steps that it took to get the good-the tools, the manual effort.
3. I agree with the take that class is not an identity presented in the 4.4 reading. It’s not a ladder as the opposing idea simply implies. The existence of a ladder means that the ‘steps/stages’ are fluid, and it’s easy to switch back and forth between them. With a change in income, or receiving higher education, people believe things will change. This isn’t true, in my opinion, it’s very hard to rotate between classes. The socialist opinion of two distinct categories, capitalists and workers seem more likely. A large majority of us are workers. We all work to obtain wealth to sustain our lives. We have to put effort into this, while the ‘owners’ profit off of our work. They profit off our work for the company without having to actively intervene.
4. This close form of dependency described is how the capitalists rely so heavily on the workers. Without workers coming in everyday and producing for the company, the flow of money abruptly stops, and the billionaires are the top no longer have their empires. Workers rely on their salaries/wages to sustain their lives, eating, owning a home, etc. Which owners exploit because the workers cannot just abandon their own flow of money abruptly. But if it did happen that way, the empire would tumble down.

1.Reading 4.3 makes a clear distinction between owners and employees based on wealth and labor. Owners are people who live mostly off investments and the labor of others. They own productive property such as businesses, stocks, bonds, or rental buildings. Their income mainly comes from profits and returns on investments. Employees, on the other hand, are people who do not own wealth and must sell their labor in order to survive. They depend on wages or salaries.

For example, someone who owns several apartment buildings and lives off rental income would be considered an owner. An office worker or a doctor who works at a hospital for a salary would be considered an employee because they depend on wages, even if they earn a high income.

2. In the quote, Adam Smith explains that labor is the true source of value. He says that labor is the “real standard” by which the value of goods can be measured. This means that money itself does not create value – it only represents it. What actually gives something value is the human labor that goes into producing it.

For example, a hospital building by itself does not automatically create value. It becomes valuable when doctors, nurses, technicians, and other staff provide medical care. The treatment, diagnosis, surgeries, and patient care all come from human labor. Without their work, the hospital would just be an empty building. This shows that labor is what actually creates value, not money or property by itself.

This connects to Parenti’s argument because workers create wealth, but they are not paid the full value of what they produce. Part of the value they create becomes profit for the owner. So the quote is saying that labor is the foundation of wealth in society.

3. Reading 4.4 argues that class is not just another identity like race or gender. I understand this to mean that class is about a person’s position in the economic system, not simply how they identify. Class determines whether someone owns wealth or has to work for wages.

I agree with this argument because class directly affects people’s material conditions and power. While someone can identify as working class, class is mainly about structure and economic relationships, not just identity or culture. It shapes people’s opportunities, interests, and political views in a very concrete way.

4. When Reading 4.4 says that class structures are built around a close form of dependency, I understand this to mean that workers and owners depend on each other in the economic system.

Workers depend on employers for income. Without a job, they cannot pay rent, buy food, or survive. At the same time, employers depend on workers to perform labor and generate profit. However, the power in this relationship is unequal because workers usually have less control.

For example, a doctor who works at a private hospital depends on that hospital for a salary. At the same time, the hospital depends on doctors and staff to provide care and generate revenue. If doctors stopped working, the hospital could not function. This shows the close economic dependency between workers and owners.

1. The distinction that reading 4.3 makes between owners and employees is the fact that an owner is someone who lives off their investments. And by investment these are things like stocks, businesses, etc. These investments have income that is made by the labor of the working class. Employees are the people that do the labor for these investments, they live off wages, and salaries. They ultimately work for an owner for money. An example of each would that Shanveer the owner of a chocolate factory has the means of production (factory, materials, employees), to never have to work a day in his life as the money from the labor of others (profit) is lining up his pockets. And then there is Shawn who is an employee of Shanveer, works for wages hourly. He is a manager of the factory, but even though his salary is well off, he is just an employee as he is still working.
2. I understand Adam Smith’s quote as labor is essential to make any sort of profit. I would put it as a universal measure of value. There is nothing to profit off of if there is no labor done to something. As he mentioned, the tree being made into furniture. No one cares about no tree until it is made into something using labor. Nominal price of something is what you pay for it and the real price is the amount of labor taken to make that thing. Simple example when you buy a loaf of bread that is 12 dollars, that is the Nominal price. And the real price would be growing of wheat, then the labor of separating grains, making dough, baking the bread, and finally packaging it to sell.
3. I think it is an interesting argument as it shows how people feel vs what they actually have to do. I don’t think class is an identity at all personally as you are forced to do these things. Working a wage, whether you are a nurse, or you work as a janitor, it has nothing to do with who you are. Those two I just named have nothing alike though they fall under the same class. The article argues that you are dependent on someone for something, and that isn’t who you are and I agree with that. Typical things that are known as identity make you relatable, such as gender and religion. But being an employee doesn’t make anything relatable as I said before, nurses will not know anything about janitors though they are in the same class.
4. I understand the argument that class structures are built upon a close form of dependency as, owners and employees need each other just as much no matter the disparity between them. This close form of dependency comes from the owner not having any profit if there is no worker, and the employee having no money if he doesn’t;t work for the same wages. Technically, both of them need each other for survival. An example would be the owner of a KFC is not working and is rich, but he needs his employees for him to maintain his money and status. Meanwhile, the employee needs the job just a much for the wage and money that comes with it.

1. According to reading 4.3, the main difference between owners and employees is that owners mostly live off their investments and properties, while employees live off their wages and salaries. Owners make money because other people work for them, but employees have to sell their labor to get paid. For instance, an owner is someone who owns a company or rental buildings and lives off that income. An employee is a worker who gets a salary or is paid hourly, like a teacher.
2. According to Adam Smith quote “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.” he’s saying that labor is what really creates value. Things become valuable because workers spend time and effort to produce them. So labor is the real price, and money is more like the label we put on that value.
3. My understanding of the argument is that class is not an identity because it’s more about your position in the economic system, not who you are. Identities like race and gender describe who you are, but class describes your position and your interests in the system. It’s about whether you own wealth or have to work for someone else. Two people can have very different cultures and identities but still be in the same class if they both depend on wages.
4. The “close form of dependency” describes how workers and owners are directly connected through work and profit. Workers rely on employers for their wages, schedules, and benefits. At the same time, Employers need workers to make the goods and services that bring in profit. However, this dependency is not equal because workers usually have less power and fewer choices. For instance, a nurse depends on the hospital for their paycheck, but the hospital can often hire another nurse if one leaves, while the nurse can’t easily find another job with the same pay and conditions. This imbalance leads to pressure and conflict, which is why the reading says class structures are built around a close form of dependenc

1. The main difference between owners and employees who has the wealth and who has to earn it, according to reading 4.3 owners, companies, buildings, and investments supply most of their income. Workers earn their money by working in order to get income. An example of an owner would be a CEO earn income from the shares in the business and profits. An employee is someone who gets a paycheck from their job such as professionals or retailer. 

2. It implies regarding Adam Smith’s quote on page 28 that cash is truly earned throughout work. There wouldn’t be any products or services to offer if people weren’t working. Although employees aren’t always paid the full amount of their service, this reflects how important they are to the economy.

3.  Reading 4.4 makes an interesting issue, in my opinion, when it says that a group is not a label. It is clear that social position matters more about person financial position within the community than it is about their understanding of themselves. Wealth is influenced by the connection you have to work and managing instead of race or gender. That described to me how society is more layered than people. 

4. I understand the reading’s statement that “class creates evolve around a tight level of interaction” as suggesting that owners and employees rely on each other in different ways. Owners count on employees to bring in earnings, and employees rely on owners for jobs and pay. For example, without employees doing the work a business cannot make earnings, but employees also rely on their jobs to survive. Considering the fact that they don’t benefit the same amount, that connection creates a system in which both sides are connected.