Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version nyu B notes v1.5 12/10/84; site csd2.UUCP
Path: utzoo!lsuc!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!epsilon!zeta!sabre!petrus!bellcore!decvax!ucbvax!ucdavis!lll-crg!seismo!harvard!cmcl2!csd2!sykora
From: sykora@csd2.UUCP (Michael Sykora)
Newsgroups: net.politics.theory
Subject: Re: Politics and Ethics--Socialism, Libertarianism, and Capitalism
Message-ID: <4340028@csd2.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 23-Dec-85 20:07:00 EST
Article-I.D.: csd2.4340028
Posted: Mon Dec 23 20:07:00 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 29-Dec-85 01:02:09 EST
References: <1547@hound.UUCP>
Organization: New York University
Lines: 55

>/* berman@psuvax1.UUCP (Piotr Berman) /  3:08 pm  Dec 18, 1985 */

>It is not only messy, but totally defies the phrase "people who created
>the means of production", which is emotionally charged and nice.

You asked how the contributions are split.  I indicated how.  What's the
problem?

>As we see, taxing profits is not taking away the fruits of hard labor,
>but collecting a part of the return on the capital.

Where did you demonstrate this?

>Some people also point that people who provide labor are not always
>"free to provide them at the agreed upon price/return or not".

In what situations are they not?  Remember, we are talking about a theoretical
system here, not one that is currently implemented.

>While capital may move freely, a laborer is greatly constrained.

While birds can fly unaided, humans cannot.  So???

>Unlike the capital owner, he must have a deal to survive.

What do you mean by a deal?

>While the owner of capital may patiently shop around, the laborer
>risks personal deprivations when he wants to shop around (move to 
>other area, abandon a job to seek for another etc.).

Please note that if you omit the "While" clause, the statement is still
true.

>While I am not against the privite enterprise, I am not satisfied
>with the glib phrase
>> they transfer the rights to the product of 
>> this labor to the payer of the fee.

What is wrong with it?  Wherein lies your dissatisfaction?

>Is human work worth only as much as it is paid?

How do you define "worth?"

>Is the value of a human equal to the sum of wages he/she collected?

"Value" to whom?  There is no such thing as objective value.

>If labor is just a commodity, is liberty a commodity as well?

Can "liberty" be bought and sold?  I'm not sure.  First, liberty needs
to be defined precisely.

Michael Sykora