Keep in mind our Online Discussion Guidelines:
https://openlab.bmcc.cuny.edu/pol-100-introduction-to-american-government-artinian/online-discussion-guidelines/
Instructions for completing this discussion board assignment:
a) Identify which discussion question you are answering in your comment by placing the relevant number at the start of your answer. For example:
2. Crime has often been used as a form of social control by…
4. Michelle Alexander’s argument about segregation…
b) Respond to two other students’ comments.
Respond to the following questions in the “Comment” box below:
- What is the distinction that Reading 4.3 makes between owners and employers? Give an example of each.
- How do you understand the quote by Adam Smith on pg. 28? What is it saying about labor?
- What are your thoughts on the main argument of Reading 4.4 that class is NOT an identity?
- 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?
1. In the reading 4.3 the distinction between owners and employers is what role they play in the production system. When you are an owner, in this class you are living off someone else’s work. Their role is to run stocks and corporations efficiently that bring abundant wealth for them by using the workers labor to their advantage. An example is a CEO running this corporation using money to have the workers produce the products for them. For employers the role is very different but it is not as low as a worker’s position, their main role is to take care of the working environment and making sure they are hiring efficient workers while keeping track of them. An example is managers and executives of any business, their status is a little higher than a worker but it is still a demanding job without a big outcome.
2. I understand this quote by focusing on this part, “money is their nominal price only”. This tells me that the quote is trying to say that labor is what gives value to these companies because without money there is no labor.
3. My thoughts on this argument that “class is not an identity” is that class isn’t based on who you are or what class system you belong in, it is about being dependent. In this case class is not giving you identity, rather it is making you realize who you are depending on.
4. This argument, “class systems are built around a close form of dependency” is understandable to me because the system needs both capitalists and workers to be able to survive. One cannot last without the other. The class systems have the capitalists at the top because they have wealth advantages that dominates over everyone else but to produce efficiently they need the workers. If this doesn’t happen then another capitalists company will just take their spot. This cycle is continuous and it is what keeps society efficient. An example of this is the workers in a factory, they depend on this job for survival but the owner depends on the workers because if enough isn’t being produced they will lose money and value to their company.
Hi Kyara, good sighting. I see we have slightly different views. It’s good to see and understand things from someone else’s perspective.
Good points throughout! Take a look at Q2 again: labor theory of value, what is it saying about where value comes from in the different things (commodities) that are made in the economy?
1) Owners are the ones who own the wealth of society, owners live off investments which includes stocks, bonds, rents, minerals royalties and other property income. Employees work for a living, employees live mostly off wages, salaries and fees. One example of an owner would be the ceo of mcdonalds or a person who invested into that company, who now owns a share. An example of an employee would their store managers or assistant managers, down to the hourly staff working at mcdonalds.
2) I understand Adam Smith quote by looking at the sentence “it is their real price; money is their nominal price only.” Labor and employees is what keeps the company going. Businesses would not be able to flourish without labor, they would not be commodities without labor. A business functions off labor, without labor their would be no money coming in. Business live off who they know need money and they will work little to nothing even though they can make millions off their own business.
3) Class is not an identity or a personality description. Social class should not describe who you are or what party you belong to. It is about making your way out of poverty and working towards what you believe in.
4) I agree with this statement because you need both owners and employees to get by, you can not do one job without the other. Owners need employees to run a business and employees need owners to be able to have a job. An example of this would be construction workers because owners need works in order to start building sites but workers need owners to let them know what they need to work on.
Hi Jasmine, good sighting. I notice we have similar and different views pertaining to each questions. Overall I like how your work was put together.
Hi Jasmine,
I love your way of viewing things. very clear to understand.
Hey Jasmine, I really love how you answered question 3, I agree 100% with how you say that class is not a personality description or identity and how you put it in terms of making it out of poverty.
Excellent summary on Q1!
On Q2: think about the following: where does the value in a product, say an iPhone, come from? What makes such a commodity valuable?
Q3: If class is not an identity, why is that, specifically?
Question 1). What is the distinction that Reading 4.3 makes between owners and employers? Give an example of each.
Answer: The distinction that reading 4.3 makes between owners and employers are while the rich who owns wealth live off their investments, which include stocks, bonds, rent minerals royalties, and other property income the poor or working class must work for a living. Their live mostly off wages, salaries and fees.
An example of this would be the giant company Amazon. According to google Amazon annual revenue sales from 2004 to 2019 generated 280.5 billion US dollars. While an average factory worker’s annual medial salary is from anywhere between $28,836 to $30,000 This depiction proves how workers are being exploited of their labor and the distinction between workers and employers.
Question 2). How do you understand the quote by Adam Smith on pg. 28? What is it saying about labor?
Answer: My interpretation of 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.” Labor plays a big factor on all commodities and individual companies can produce as much as they want then charge their consumers whatever they see fit. This can be categorized on the equilibrium scale as an exchange for service for goods or money. It also depicts the importance of labor and shows that without labor businesses would not be successful in making a profit.
Question 3). What are your thoughts on the main argument of Reading 4.4 that class is NOT an identity?
Answer: My interpretation of “Class is not an identity” depends on how you define this term is that the notion of class plays a huge factor when it pertains to identity. Marx mentioned the two-class of people, the bourgeoisie and the proletariat and how they see themselves in society.
As mentioned it the excerpt “liberals see it as a conceptually symmetrical to race and gender.” Just as race and gender class plays a pivotal role in the identity of socioeconomic status. Class infers the structure that imposes very specifics logic of actions on people in society.
Question 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?
Answer: My understanding of “class structures are built around a close form of dependency” mainly depends on which category you fall in, whether its the lower, middle or upper class and is structured by educational and income levels. Different level of income and educational levels depicts what status you hold in society. For instance, Jeff Bezos falls in the 1% of upper class or rich while his factory worker falls in the range of low or middle class.
You quoted the key quote in Q2! Now, if we paraphrase it, what does it tell us about WHERE does the value of an iPhone come from? That’s the key point about the Labor Theory of Value that this quote is emphasizing.
On Q3: yes, but what makes class NOT an identity that someone has?
1. In reading 4.3, there are differences between owners and employees. Being in the owing class, lives off investments that include stocks, bonds, rents, mineral royalties, and other property income. This makes it true for making money and generating profit. As of employees, lives mostly of wages, salaries, and fees. Mostly living pay paycheck by check and depending on their owners. An example would be the owner of a day care center and the employees would be part time and full time workers which are teachers, assistant director, and directors.
2. As Adam Smith quoted, ” Labor…is alone the ultimate and real standard by which the value…” I believe that labor is the root of keeping any company from growing. If there is no labor nothing would grow and it will result to chaos.
3. In the argument of reading 4.4, “Class is not an identity”, I believe that is true. I don’t think that any social class can defined you or where ever you come from. I think its all about having humanity.
4. In the reading 4.4, when stating that “class structures are built around a close form of dependency it refers to having employees that work for their bosses. If it wasn’t for labor, then companies wouldn’t function properly and owners would loose their business. I think its all about depending on one another.
Heyyy, your statements was clear and understandable. I liked how you explained question number 2, i agree that without labor nothing would grow because even capitalist need help in growing their business.
Hello Bianka, great replies and I definitely agree with how much dependance we have on each other. Before reading this weeks articles I forgot about how much Owners also have a big dependence as well even if they are rich.
your answeer too number 2 reminds me of the pandemic and how many retail stores lost out on so much money and their opening because online isnt enough they have made “half ” of what they usually do and they want all that money back as you can see places went down hill in sales and as a business and profit they made no money basically for 6 months maybe even longer . No labour no growth no one to sell or put out more product for people to buy lost of money
On Q2: what else about the labor theory of value, think about it from the point of view of what gives value to a product made by a company?
On Q3: think a bit more: HOW is social class not an identity?
1.The distinctions in reading 4.3 between owners and employers is that the owning class live off mostly envestments which include Stoke, bonds, rent , and other property income while employers live off the money they gain from the work they do for the owners.Employers live off wages, salaries, and fees. An example of this would be the owner of a retail store who gets richer off the profits of the clothing store, while the employers work for them and depend on the owner for a living .
2. Adam Smith statted ” Labor..is alone the ultimate and real standard by which the value..”by which this to me meant labor alone is something so great something needed, it has its “own value”. Without labor much of the world wouldn’t be the same today. Labor is need by all owning class .
3.My thoughts on the main argument that class is not an identity is pretty much that it is not an identity . A certain class dos not make you who you are as. person it dos not define you. You can be the poorest person and still have a beautiful should. People with money are not all stuck up or happy about having so much money and lower class are not all poor or sad because of their class .
4.The quote “class structure are built around a close for of dependency” means that everything and everyone depends on each other. Owners need workers and workers need owners without each other there would be no class structure. Without workers the owners would not make any profit and wouldn’t be able to move up the class structure or earn more wealth. Without owners workers won’t be able to work and provide for families they need owners in order to make a living.
Hello Morayma, Number 3 caught my attention when you said, “people with money are not all stuck up or happy about having so much money and lower class are not all poor or sad because of their class”. This is definitely true, many think that a class structure affects who you are as a person but in reality it only affects some of your life. I have met some lower class people that are always happy and vibrate. Money isn’t everything in life and you answered that question with a great example.
your answer was clear and precise for anyone to understand. keep up the good work
Hey Morayma, I really agree with the way you answered question 2, the world would not be the same world it is today without labor. Every social class depends on labor from the working class.
Very true, why? 🙂 What’s so fundamental about labor in human society?
i agree with your answer to number this is how i looked at it because like in retail stores they literally just make new product and then it has to be in all stores then workers are used because people buy the clothing and this is how they make their money. They use workers to get their money and it continues on .
On Q2: yes, what does it mean to say that “labor has its own value”, can we connect the process of labor (work) to how value is made in a product?
Q3: interesting point, but then: what DOES your social class position define about you (it does structure how you live in a certain way, right, in terms of how you participate in the economy, or what you are compelled to do every day? But still, why is it that class is not an identity (stay close to the reading on this one)
1.The distinction that reading 4.3 makes between owners and employers is that owners live off investments , stocks , rents , businesses they own. For employers they are the ones who live off their pay check to pay check they depend on their jobs for money unlike the owners of companies.
2.The quote by Adam Smith “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.” I think that this means that without labor a business cannot function and without labor no money is being made.
3.On the main argument on reading 4.4 that class is not an identity is that it is not an identity because the money you make does not define you. You could be making the same amount of money as someone and be totally different to that person.
4.in the reading 4.4 what I understand from the argument “class structures are built around a close form of dependency” is that everyone depends on each other it is almost like a ring , where every one needs each other. The worker depends on their owner to give them a job so they could make money while the owner depends on the employee to work while they make a-lot more money.
Hey I agree with your statement for question 3, the money you make does not define who you are or what class you belong too. I also agree with your answer for #4 that basically everyone does depend on each other no matter how you look at it. Great job!
I was able to understand your answer very easily, good job on wording
On Q2: very true, but what specifically why is it that without labor a business cannot function?
Q3: In what ways is social class not an identity?
1) The distinction that is made in the 4.3 reading that is between owners, and employees is found in the purpose of discussing the idea of exploitation that is seen in the workplace. The “owner” typically refers to an individual who is a member of the owning class. Being a member entails that your income is very large and that it comes mostly from the labor of other people. Evidently an example of such, that is in concerns to the employee is how most workers typically earn less than the labor they provide. However for the owner, the example falls under the idea of surplus value. This concept is used to form the thought of what many would agree “the secret to great wealth is not to work hard but to have others work hard for you.” Although this is how exploitation arises in the workplace, this is the only reason why their wealth increases, while the employee continues to struggle.
2) The quote made by Adam Smith on page 28 partially allowed me to have the understanding of what was answered above in question 1. the topic is within the power that owners hold, which in fact will normally get out of hand in regards to what is just. So what I understood from the quote is how the labor of employees is the true price needed to be paid in order for the owner to succeed. Thus, it occurs most often that the labor that is given, results in only a fraction of a reward that is deserved. Yet, it leaves the employees with only the bare minimum, and the victor is always the owner. Although what would remain is there being no true care for a struggling worker.
3) The main argument provided in the reading of 4.4 that states that class is not an identity, allows me to believe that the statement is being used as an excuse. In the passage it states, “so when they claim to be against liberal “identity politics,” they aren’t actually rejecting it, but simply promoting their favored version of it.” Clearly the idea is followed with the knowledge how impactful the topic of race influences others’ mindset. So instead of providing an insight to what is truly meant, it avoids a disruption in their progress. Therefore, having no true care to allow the thought of it to remain whether it is taken positively or negatively, it silently adheres to the already existing habits people have created in concerns to identity.
4) In understanding the statement, “class structures are built around a close form of dependency” to me normally refers to each classified group having their own support, and whether or not they have that extra help to depend on along with their support. Throughout passage it can be known how “classes” may identify races, genders, and even in educational aspects based on income. And so, a form of dependency is created with one another in that group. However, although we are united by groups there is still the clear presence of there being division between all unless there is the present advantage. What is also envisioned is how a form of hierarchy takes place. in the example of owners and their employees, the exploitation among them will forever stand but it is how owners gain their success, until the employees have the chance to do the same when they finally become owners as well.
1) The diference from an owner and an employee is that the employee works for the owner and does all the hard work and the owner takes the advantage and benefits from the exploitation of the employee
2) On page 28. Adam smith states that, 2000 workers in in a manufacturing don’t make one fourth of the market value. this shows how manufactures or capitalist exploit they’re workers and how they do not spend money on they’re workers, and just want workers to create them profit
3) I don’t believe class is an identity because the majority of people identify themselves in a higher position than they actually are, so it does not identify who they really are.
4) The close form of dependency is that both the capitalism and the working class depend on each other. Capitalist need employees to do all their work and create them profit and employees need capitalist to maintain their job and wages.
On Q2: review a bit: is somehow, the source of profit, connected to the process of labor?
1.The qualification that perusing 4.3 makes among proprietors and bosses is that proprietors live off ventures , stocks , rents , organizations they own. For managers they are the ones who live off their check to pay check they rely upon their positions for cash not at all like the proprietors of organizations.
2. Adam Smith quote work is separated from everyone else by a definitive and genuine norm by which the estimation of everything is consistent and places can be assessed and analyzed. It is their genuine value; cash is their ostensible cost as it were.” Labor plays a major factor on all items and individual organizations can create as much as they need at that point and charge their customers whatever they see fit. This can be ordered on the balance scale as a trade for administration for merchandise or cash. It likewise portrays the significance of work and shows that without work organizations would not be effective in making a benefit.
3. Class isn’t a character or a character depiction. Social class ought not portray what your identity is or what party you have a place with. It is tied in with advancing out of destitution and moving in the direction of what you trust in.
4.This contention, “class frameworks are worked around a nearby type of reliance” is justifiable to me on the grounds that the framework needs the two entrepreneurs and laborers to have the option to endure. One can’t last without the other. The class frameworks have the business people at the top since they have rich focal points that overwhelms over every other person yet to create productively they need the laborers. In the event that this doesn’t occur, at that point another industrialists organization will simply take their spot. This cycle is constant and it is the thing that keeps society proficient. A case of this is the laborers in a plant, they rely upon this activity for endurance however the proprietor relies upon the laborers provided that enough isn’t being delivered they will lose cash and incentive to their organization.
1) the distinction between owners and employers that reading 4.3 suggests is the fact that owners are able to live comfortably off of their investments, stocks, rents, their owned businesses whereas the employers are the people who are subjected to live paycheck to paycheck and are more dependent on their one source of income.
2) The quote by Adam Smith on pg 28 “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 normal price only.” I think that what Adam meant by this is, labor from workers is what makes a company be able to function and progress.
3) I agree completely with reading 4.4’s suggestion that class is not an identity. To me, I find it oppressive to identify someone as their social status in terms of wealth, people are much more than just their sources of income.
4) I understand “class structures are built around a close form of dependency” as a way of saying that no matter what class you’re in or what you seem to classify as, everyone in any class is co dependent on each other whether they’re aware of it or not. Workers depend on their employers to provide the money they need to live off of to make ends meet and owners depend and rely on their workers to keep the business functioning and making them more money.
Great way of putting it Anicia, I agree with your points.
Yes, you’re very close on Q2! One last thing to think about: HOW is it that labor from workers enables a company to function?
1.The qualification among proprietors and bosses that perusing 4.3 recommends is the way that proprietors can live serenely off of their speculations, stocks, leases, their claimed organizations though the businesses are the individuals who are exposed to live check to check and are more reliant on their one wellspring of pay.
2. I understand this statement by zeroing in on this part, “cash is their ostensible cost as it were”. This discloses to me that the statement is attempting to state that work is the thing that offers an incentive to these organizations on the grounds that without cash there is no work.
3.Class isn’t a character or a character portrayal. Social class ought not depict what your identity is or what party you have a place with. It is tied in with advancing out of destitution and progressing in the direction of what you have faith in.
4.My understanding of “class structures are worked around a nearby type of reliance” chiefly relies upon which classification you fall in, regardless of whether it’s the lower, center or high society and is organized by instructive and pay levels. Distinctive degree of pay and instructive levels portrays what status you hold in the public arena. For example, Jeff Bezos falls in the 1% of privileged or rich while his assembly line laborer falls in the scope of the low or working class.
1-In 4.3 to my understanding he explains the diffference in th field of working when you are the owner you are working for someone elses work to make sure that everything is intact. you have to run everything making sure workers are being used to the advantage of the business . Employers have morepower to the extent of makng sure people are being hired to drive the business . Last is the workers who havw to do everything thei “manager” says to do because at the end of the day the owners of these bsuiness want money so they need people to make people spend money so the business can be on top.
2- To my understandng of the quote i think he is saying without labour therr is no business workers are needed o drive business because without it its nothing just like wit corona virus happened many business closed some are beginning to reopen and some are closed for good to the ones that are slowly opening they want all that money that they lost due to the pandemic it is all about money and keeping these CEO business up and running. In other words without labour there is no business you have to pay people to help drive your business thats just how it works.
3- class is not an identity i agree with this becaue people dont ask to be or work where they do people just need it that dosent mean anything about you because regardless you have to work to pay bills . people can get whatever they want if they put their mind to it so class shouldnt identify you as a person .
4- i agree with this because you need both workers and owners why because these owners want money and the best way for them is to use their money to pay people to work for them and drive their business to more money and success .An example cn be as simple as a retail job they open their store and they need people in it to help csh pople ot because thats how they make their money when people buy things and owners are needes for new product to be in the stores and workers are in charge of putting it out so clients can seee and buy it and this cycle continues.
1. Owners will always have money from the work of the employees and retire comfortably without money running out and are feeding mostly from investments, whereas Employers can be small business owners but big corporations like the Owners.
2. Based on the quote by Adam Smith, I believe that he is describing that labor cost money and time. It is not a free charge. There has to be a price for the value that is put into work.
On Q2, yes, but let’s be even more specific: what do you mean by “free charge” in this context?
I know Q2 is not obvious as an answer, but it’s good practice to think about what the question asks. I’m gonna go over it in my Module 4 outro video this week!
1. Owners live mostly off of investments example of being stocks, bonds, rents, and property income. Employees live mostly off of wages, salaries, and fees. The distinction between them is by the range of income between both classes.
2. The quote to me means that without labor companies wouldn’t succeed. Labor and employees are a big part of companies right now. Without labor and their employees work wouldn’t get done.
3. I agree on class not being an identity because you get put in a specific class based off of the money you make and that doesn’t identify you. It doesn’t personally have anything to do about your character so being put in a class based off of the money can’t identify you.
4. My understanding is that one having a company you depend on your employees to do the work.
What is the distinction that Reading 4.3 makes between owners and employers? Give an example of each.
Distinction based on employee and owners is difficult, given some top executives and professionals have incomes that qualify them as high middle class and middle class, while some small store owners rank as low class.
How do you understand the quote by Adam Smith on pg. 28? What is it saying about labor?
The quote by Adam Smith on labor shows the important role it plays in creating value at different stages of the value chain. In this relation, Smith considered money as the nominal value of goods, while the true value of the product is the labor expended up to the point that the consumer uses such a product.
What are your thoughts on the main argument of Reading 4.4 that class is NOT an identity?
Class is not an identity, given that identities are permanent individual identifiers, while it is possible to move either up or down the social classes depending on prevailing circumstances.
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?
Class structure dependency means that each class is dependent on the other for its survival. An employee is dependent on the capitalist for their earnings, while the capitalist is dependent on the employee’s labor to maintain their capitalist status. They must find common ground for the system to work. Through unionization, the workers have a means of threatening the capitalist’s position, while the latter threatens the livelihood of the former. Owners are the proprietors of the means of production, from the large stock owners to the humble store owners. On the contrary, employees provide their labor to produce goods and services in exchange for payment. An example of an employer would be Google’s shareholders, while employees would be the programmers and engineers at the company.
1.Owners are those who own stocks, investments, properties and basically live of them and don’t have to work at all.Employee is someone who owns nothing and has no capital and has to work for a living in order to survive and usually works under these owners.
2. The quote essentially tries to explain that labor is directly proportional to the value of an item and not the money. Money can’t give it shape or worth rather it’s the labor that goes into an item which then makes it then worth having a value.
3. I kind of agree to it that once you understand the complete dynamics of class and it’s widespread implications on society, it becomes eventually clear that class is much more than mere identity rather it is a backbone which either creates or solves issues such as race, gender, etc. I would say class is like a tree and the other identities are like it’s branches which indirectly depend on it. If you don’t water the tree and just water the branches, nothing is going to happen at the end of the day because you are not focusing on the root class.
3.All social classes are interdependent upon each other and they need each other to function in order to thrive. It’s a give and take situation where one class possesses the skillset and the other class possesses capital. Both exchange what they have in order to get what they want. A factory owner needs his products built and a worker needs the money to survive. Where it goes wrong in this interdependent system is when the owning class yields a far higher profit margin compared to what it gives in recompense to the labour who possessed the skillset to build the product. Despite that enormous difference, this is the way how our society is economically functioning.