NationStates

The Black Forrest wrote:

The Emerald Legion wrote:
Incorrect. Workers do not, on their own, generate wealth.

Because the executives can do on their own eh?

Very soon, yes. But that's beside the point.

Nobody generates wealth. Wealth exists. You simply shift it around, or sometimes discover more.

Ifreann wrote:Of course they do. No amount of investment will turn a tree into furniture, it takes work.

And no amount of work will create a tree from thin air.

Ifreann wrote:

Nakena wrote:Is the US slowly beocming a "Corporate Police State"?

Becoming? No.

---

The Emerald Legion wrote:
Incorrect. Workers do not, on their own, generate wealth.

Of course they do. No amount of investment will turn a tree into furniture, it takes work.

Unless you automate the process... it does not necessarily require human physical work. But what does this have to do with the topic? (Which is a mess anyways).

The Emerald Legion wrote:

The Black Forrest wrote:
Because the executives can do on their own eh?

Very soon, yes. But that's beside the point.

There are still workers involved.

Nobody generates wealth. Wealth exists. You simply shift it around, or sometimes discover more.

Facebook begs to differ.

Ifreann wrote:Of course they do. No amount of investment will turn a tree into furniture, it takes work.

And no amount of work will create a tree from thin air.

That makes no sense.

The Emerald Legion wrote:

Ifreann wrote:Of course they do. No amount of investment will turn a tree into furniture, it takes work.

And no amount of work will create a tree from thin air.

Trees come from seeds, planted in suitable soil. I don't know what you think this has to do with anything.

The Emerald Legion wrote:Nobody generates wealth. Wealth exists. You simply shift it around, or sometimes discover more.

That's gold.

The Emerald Legion wrote:And no amount of work will create a tree from thin air.

...Huh?

Atheris wrote:

The Emerald Legion wrote:And no amount of work will create a tree from thin air.

...Huh?

Trees do need air to grow, so the confusion is multi-layered.

The Emerald Legion wrote:

Ifreann wrote:Of course they do. No amount of investment will turn a tree into furniture, it takes work.

And no amount of work will create a tree from thin air.

Really weird attempt at a retort. It really is quite strange.

Ifreann wrote:

The Emerald Legion wrote:
And no amount of work will create a tree from thin air.

Trees come from seeds, planted in suitable soil. I don't know what you think this has to do with anything.

Unfortunately, you don't have seed or soil or ten years to wait for a tree to mature.

Obviously not. Because you're ignoring the material reality that work does not create things from thin air.

The New California Republic wrote:

The Emerald Legion wrote:

And no amount of work will create a tree from thin air.

Really weird attempt at a retort. It really is quite strange.

Not really? Marxism ignores that workers can't work without something to work on. It ignores that labor is only another piece of material wealth to be bought, bartered, and exchanged or used, just like lumber, just like steel, just like buildings.

The Emerald Legion wrote:

The New California Republic wrote:Really weird attempt at a retort. It really is quite strange.

Not really? Marxism ignores that workers can't work without something to work on. It ignores that labor is only another piece of material wealth to be bought, bartered, and exchanged or used, just like lumber, just like steel, just like buildings.

Yes, really. Marxism doesn't ignore inputs, that's something you have just made up, likely in an odd attempt to salvage something from that weird statement you made.

The Emerald Legion wrote:

Ifreann wrote:Trees come from seeds, planted in suitable soil. I don't know what you think this has to do with anything.

Unfortunately, you don't have seed or soil or ten years to wait for a tree to mature.

...what?

Obviously not. Because you're ignoring the material reality that work does not create things from thin air.

Air is a necessary component in the growth of trees.

The New California Republic wrote:Really weird attempt at a retort. It really is quite strange.

Not really? Marxism ignores that workers can't work without something to work on. It ignores that labor is only another piece of material wealth to be bought, bartered, and exchanged or used, just like lumber, just like steel, just like buildings.

Lumber, which workers harvest, steel, which workers make by various means, and buildings, which workers *checks notes* build.

Ifreann wrote:

The Emerald Legion wrote:
Unfortunately, you don't have seed or soil or ten years to wait for a tree to mature.

...what?

Obviously not. Because you're ignoring the material reality that work does not create things from thin air.

Air is a necessary component in the growth of trees.

Not really? Marxism ignores that workers can't work without something to work on. It ignores that labor is only another piece of material wealth to be bought, bartered, and exchanged or used, just like lumber, just like steel, just like buildings.

Lumber, which workers harvest, steel, which workers make by various means, and buildings, which workers *checks notes* build.

What do you mean what? Do you really not understand how trees work?

Odd that trees aren't spontaneously falling out of the sky then.

Stop acting obtuse. Yes, trees use air to grow. But without a seed, you're not going to get a tree. If I have a seed, and you don't. You need that seed to get a tree. I have no reason to give it to you unless provided something in return.

Private property began when some entrepreneurial strongman figured out that he can just wall off some natural resource, which was formally held in common, and use violence to enforce his right to dictate how it is used.

Since property and ownership are arbitrary concepts with no basis in objectively measurable reality anyways, nobody deserves to own anything and the rightful distribution of property is whatever distribution creates the socially optimal results. Of course the definition of "socially optimal" varies with ideology, but this laissez-faire idea that there exists such a thing as the natural distribution of property is really strange, if you think about it.

The Emerald Legion wrote:

Ifreann wrote:...what?


Air is a necessary component in the growth of trees.


Lumber, which workers harvest, steel, which workers make by various means, and buildings, which workers *checks notes* build.

What do you mean what? Do you really not understand how trees work?

I know how trees work, I don't understand why you're telling me I don't have seeds or soil or time.

Odd that trees aren't spontaneously falling out of the sky then.

They do regularly fall in the woods, though they are rarely heard doing so.

Stop acting obtuse. Yes, trees use air to grow. But without a seed, you're not going to get a tree. If I have a seed, and you don't. You need that seed to get a tree. I have no reason to give it to you unless provided something in return.

Seeds occur in nature without human intervention. Kinda how plants have reproduced for millions of years.

Ifreann wrote:

The Emerald Legion wrote:
What do you mean what? Do you really not understand how trees work?

I know how trees work, I don't understand why you're telling me I don't have seeds or soil or time.

Odd that trees aren't spontaneously falling out of the sky then.

They do regularly fall in the woods, though they are rarely heard doing so.

Stop acting obtuse. Yes, trees use air to grow. But without a seed, you're not going to get a tree. If I have a seed, and you don't. You need that seed to get a tree. I have no reason to give it to you unless provided something in return.

Seeds occur in nature without human intervention. Kinda how plants have reproduced for millions of years.

But the seeds don't belong to you. Neither do the trees. You have to purchase them from their owner. Likewise, if you live in a desert, there are no trees, and someone must be motivated to bring lumber to where you are. Or you must go to where the materials to make your work valuable are.

The Emerald Legion wrote:

Ifreann wrote:...what?


Air is a necessary component in the growth of trees.


Lumber, which workers harvest, steel, which workers make by various means, and buildings, which workers *checks notes* build.

What do you mean what? Do you really not understand how trees work?

Odd that trees aren't spontaneously falling out of the sky then.

Stop acting obtuse. Yes, trees use air to grow. But without a seed, you're not going to get a tree. If I have a seed, and you don't. You need that seed to get a tree. I have no reason to give it to you unless provided something in return.

I am going to do you a favor as one who often thinks my writings are obvious.

What the hell are you on about?

If you are trying to suggest trees are material wealth......a stretch and yet very subjective.

The Emerald Legion wrote:

Ifreann wrote:I know how trees work, I don't understand why you're telling me I don't have seeds or soil or time.


They do regularly fall in the woods, though they are rarely heard doing so.


Seeds occur in nature without human intervention. Kinda how plants have reproduced for millions of years.

But the seeds don't belong to you. Neither do the trees. You have to purchase them from their owner. Likewise, if you live in a desert, there are no trees, and someone must be motivated to bring lumber to where you are. Or you must go to where the materials to make your work valuable are.

You realize you are speaking of workers again. Unless you think the lumber I get from the yards come from joe bobs saw?

The Emerald Legion wrote:Very soon, yes. But that's beside the point.

Nobody generates wealth. Wealth exists. You simply shift it around, or sometimes discover more.

You clearly have no knowledge of economics. Allow me to educate you.

What is wealth? Wealth is a collection of goods or services of value.
What is value? The measure of how much people are willing to pay for a good or service.

Therefore you can generate wealth by transforming goods or services from one form into another via labor by taking an object of lesser value and transforming it into one of greater value. An automobile may not be physically worth more than the metal it is made out of but it actually has greater value. And therefore an automobile factory creates value thus generating wealth.

The Black Forrest wrote:

The Emerald Legion wrote:
But the seeds don't belong to you. Neither do the trees. You have to purchase them from their owner. Likewise, if you live in a desert, there are no trees, and someone must be motivated to bring lumber to where you are. Or you must go to where the materials to make your work valuable are.

You realize you are speaking of workers again. Unless you think the lumber I get from the yards come from joe bobs saw?

No. I'm speaking of who owns the trees.

Purpelia wrote:

The Emerald Legion wrote:Very soon, yes. But that's beside the point.

Nobody generates wealth. Wealth exists. You simply shift it around, or sometimes discover more.

You clearly have no knowledge of economics. Allow me to educate you.

What is wealth? Wealth is a collection of goods or services of value.
What is value? The measure of how much people are willing to pay for a good or service.

Therefore you can generate wealth by transforming goods or services from one form into another via labor by taking an object of lesser value and transforming it into one of greater value. An automobile may not be physically worth more than the metal it is made out of but it actually has greater value. And therefore an automobile factory creates value thus generating wealth.

Incorrect. You're ignoring the value of the labor, which is just as bad as ignoring the value of the materials. When you buy a car you're not just buying a hunk of metal and plastics.

Now, hypothetically, you could just buy a hunk of metal and plastics and build your own car. Piece by piece. But you don't. You buy a car. Which means you're paying for all the labor to get it to you, as well as all the materials contained therein.

The Emerald Legion wrote:

The Black Forrest wrote:
You realize you are speaking of workers again. Unless you think the lumber I get from the yards come from joe bobs saw?

No. I'm speaking of who owns the trees.

And what? Trees sold for lumber tend to be corporations. Last I checked the CEO or the board(even said owner) isn't out there cutting them down, prepping them for transport, loading them, driving them to the mills, unloading them, milling them, storing them, loading them, driving to the sellers, unloading them, selling them.

Your argument is silly suggesting wealth generation is only a small group.

The Black Forrest wrote:

The Emerald Legion wrote:
Incorrect. Workers do not, on their own, generate wealth.

Because the executives can do on their own eh?

Yes, through strategic decisions. They make decisions regarding capital expenditures, mergers & acquisitions, leverage, and cash flows. All of these things contribute far more to the actual value of a company than the output of a single worker.

You know you have to ask yourself "Are we the baddies?" when oil giants chip in to fund your endeavors.

Rusozak wrote:You know you have to ask yourself "Are we the baddies?" when oil giants chip in to fund your endeavors.

Nah, that suggests you're on the right path.

The Emerald Legion wrote:

Rusozak wrote:You know you have to ask yourself "Are we the baddies?" when oil giants chip in to fund your endeavors.

Nah, that suggests you're on the right path.

I really hope this is one of those frequent lapses into self parody you mention in your sig.

Post War America wrote:Capitalists prop up an organization essentially created to protect the interests of capital? Inconcievable.

Just bringing this up because I like this quote.