Some people don't seem to understand the meme and think this pie represents a companies whole revenue. This pie represents the revenue generated from an individuals labor. The current glaring issue with capitalism is that people think your employer is entitled to a slice of the labors pie. Your employer is entitled to Zero percent of the revenue you generate from your labor! But sadly the only reason the imaginary line in the stock market goes up is become employers and "investors" have stolen your value. While the meme is over simplified it's accurate. Also your bosses/CEOs labor value is far lower than they would have you believe.

Shop local, give money to co-ops, unionize your work place, unionize your living space (renter unions are a thing.), volunteer as often as possible, give leftovers to the homeless if you regularly don't eat your leftovers, VOTE, attend town halls when able, get to know your neighbors even if you don't speak the same language or have a rough past with them, I can go on but these things can help at the local level and prevent the race to the bottom we're currently stuck in.

[–] GregorGizeh@lemmy.zip 9 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Eh, actually there are arguments to be made for the employer being entitled to a share of the value, yes.

They provide the materials, the tools and machinery, the designs that are being made (assuming some sort of manufacturing company for this example). They also carry the risk (unless of course they are a corporation, the ridiculous entity created to reap the advantages of personhood while avoiding all its responsibilities and drawbacks).

So, a slice of the pizza should be for them, but certainly not 7/8.

[–] OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

They provide the materials, the tools and machinery, the designs that are being made (assuming some sort of manufacturing company for this example).

Other workers made the materials, the tools, the machinery, and the designs. If the owner did they occupy a class position as a worker and owner.

They also carry the risk (unless of course they are a corporation, the ridiculous entity created to reap the advantages of personhood while avoiding all its responsibilities and drawbacks).

The risk that they might be a worker if their venture fails.

[–] agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works 3 points 11 months ago

If the owner did they occupy a class position as a worker and owner.

Yup. Employers are entitled to a portion of total revenue proportional to the value they added. In the case of employers who perform necessary work, including administrative/clerical work, this can be a healthy sum. In the case of employers who solely fit the capitalist role of investor, this amount is $0.

[–] NatakuNox@lemmy.world -1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

No the employer is entitled to the value of the product or service. They are not entitled to the value created by their workers.

Your Second argument is false as well because they don't get to pass on manufacturing and designing cost to the workers! That cost should be passed onto the customer. Your argument is lie that workers should have no work without the benevolence of their employers. If their work is so meaningless that the owners are entitled to the workers pie then way do the owners need them at all? It's the reason why corporations always threaten to replace workers with machines or outsourcing but never actually do it. It's because the true value in a for profit company is how much value you can steal from the lowly workers. In the machine threat, hiring a electrical, robotic, and software engineers cost more than 1000 minimum wage workers. But they can't steal those engineers value because they are well educated and know their value. It's what the 100% of the GOP and 50% DNC hate education. Education prevents exploitation... As for outsourcing all workers are catching onto the theft and are fighting back as well. Add in shipping costs, bad pr, taxes, and time, no way outsourcing will grow like it did in the 80s/90s/2000s.

[–] unique_hemp@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 11 months ago

Your Second argument is false as well because they don't get to pass on manufacturing and designing cost to the workers! That cost should be passed onto the customer.

This cost is passed onto the consumer, just from what I've seen the value of the work calculations tend to be based on the price of the product, which actually includes this "passing on".

[–] Kanda@reddthat.com 7 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Also your bosses/CEOs labor value is far lower than they would have you believe.

Zero is a very low number, yet they make my annual every month

[–] Gabu@lemmy.ml 4 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I wouldn't call it zero, per say - they are pretty good actors, performing for a crowd of rich fucks.

[–] Kanda@reddthat.com 4 points 11 months ago

They might be good at what they do, but where's the value?

[–] Asafum@feddit.nl 1 points 11 months ago

All I can say is The Big Brain Economists have said that "the labor value theory is absolutely bunk and has no basis in reality." Along with "only marxists believe this drivel."

I'm not A Big Brain or an economist so I can't say why they say these things, but I have seen a lot of pushback on this concept. I think it all comes down to the "agreement" we make when we accept a job, not that we have a choice. "Not working" is only an option for those that are already rich.