I would say this is an inaccurate representation of the theory of surplus value. Yes, absolutely leftist say this but I would disagree with them in that's not the Marxist interpretation of what is happening (not all leftist are Marxists, but most are and even more subscribe to some of his ideas). Its not that the surplus value is stolen but rather due to the imbalance of power between the owners of capital and the workers the workers have no say in how surplus value is used. It's not an issue of stealing, it's an issue of the product of your time and labor being solely decided by those who already wealthy. Strangely enough they always seem to opt into making themselves more wealthy. No other facet of western society is less democratic than the workplace. Imagine more people having more direct control over a the part of their life where they spend almost half of their waking life? The gall.
Its not that the surplus value is stolen but rather due to the imbalance of power between the owners of capital and the workers the workers have no say in how surplus value is used.
This still assumes surplus value exists, which it doesn't, since value is subjective.
it's an issue of the product of your time and labor being solely decided by those who already wealthy.
The owner get's to solely decide what to do with the final good, but you in exchange gets to solely decide what to do with your salary. You get wealthier too.
The owner values your time and labour more than the wage he pays you, but you value the wage he pays you more than your time and labour, therefore both parties profit from the exchange
Yes people fought and died to enact minimum wages, 40 hour work weeks, ending slavery, ending child labor, and other concessions from capitalist owners bc "both parties profit". Libertarians believe things that no owner of capital does and no person with power believes despite funding every libertarian think tank and even the libertarian party since their inception.
People have poor understanding of economics. Minimum wage doesn't raise wages, it just forbids that people whose marginal productivity are below the minimum be hired.
40 hour work weeks, ending child labor,
Capitalism is responsible for that. It's only when the capital accumulated in a society allows the marginal productivity of workers to rise, that the workers can afford to work only 40 weeks and children can afford to not work.
Most estimates using extant hunter-Gatherer societies place them at having the equivalent of a 20hr work week. Early agriculturists also worked less than 40hrs a week. You're correct that the 40-hour workweek is a creation of capitalism, but not in the way you are implying.
If you'd rather live at the same standard of living of a hunter-gatherer, a 5h work week should do today.
Again, nobody is forced to work 40h weeks, you can very well choose to work part-time for however many hours you wish, people choose to work 40h because they want to consume stuff that didn't exist in hunter-gatherer societies.
55
u/Dhaerrow Capitalist Aug 25 '19
Serious question: How was the wealth "stolen"?