The manipulation and mis-conception of money
For all of us money is a nessecity, and without money nobody would last very long in todays' society. It is for the majority of the human race the only means of survival within the capitalist system. So you would think that with its' "life giving powers" and constant everyday use, money would be better understood by those most dependant upon it. Unfortunetly this isn't the case. It is not what money is or how it impacts on the whole of society, but how money can best be "made" by the individual, for the individual. Why? Greed is a factor, but the need to survive is probably the most accurate answer among those who have to work for it. The need to know what it is, is over shadowed by the need to have what it is. So what is it?
Merriams definition
"something generally accepted as a medium of exchange, a measure of value, or a means of payment."
Wiki
Money is any good or tokens that functions as a medium of exchange that is socially and legally accepted in payment for goods and services and in settlement of debts. Money also serves as a standard of value for measuring the relative worth of different goods and services and as a store of value."
What can we take from these definitions? Firstly that money is used as exchange. This we have already established (and hopefully experienced). Secondly, money is used as a relative measure of value. But what does this mean exactly? Money represents the value of a product in relation to that of another product. But what does this tell us? At first glance not much, other than its' use as an exchange. But within that answer there is the "missing link" as it were.
Money represents the value contained within a commodity. This value must be common to ALL commodities, yet different from the commodity itself in order for any intermediate exchange to work. So what do all commodities have in common?
Human labour power. This is how the working class can be exploited with little or no awareness with relative ease. H.L.P is, under the capitalist system, a commodity. It is bought and sold much in the same way as anything else on the market. What makes it unique (and expoitable) is that unlike other commodities it can produce more value than the value it was origanally bought for. Profit, then, is nothing more than what the buyer of H.L.P can take from the surplus labour of the seller of H.L.P. Simply by selling our productive capabilities for less than we create allows capitalism, and by extention, capitalists, to exploit the workers. And once more, it is through private ownership over the means to produce which leaves the majority with little choice but to enter into the "free market".
Wonder why you're still working the same amount of hours as someone from the fifteen hundreds despite the massive leap in technology? Ask the leaches that are slowly sucking us dry through thier manipulation and our misconceptions of money.
- Martin Da Yoica's blog
- Login or register to post comments
Comments :
Some complications
If your work produces, say, $200 dollars gross income/day and your cost (including salary) is $100/day, then it seems like you ought to be able as a worker to command a higher salary. The chain of events that prevents your raise looks, to me, like this: you go ask for a raise, your boss says no because another worker can do your job and will be satisfied for $100/day. So you decide you want to get all of the $200/day income that your work is generating, but then you need an upfront investment of capital to create the environment (equipment, subordinates, advertising, etc) that allows your work to be worth $200/day.
This suggests there are two ways workers can make more money: organize, so they can all demand higher salaries and not undercut each other, and pool resources, to create their own company with a more equitable pay scale. The second option doesn't usually happen because the upfront costs are enormous and anyway once the workers own the company odds are they're gonna start looking for the cheapest labor to maximize their company profits. Thus, generally the only real option available to workers who want higher wages for the same work is to organize.
(That's all from the short-term perspective of the workers, but there's also a long-term interest in ensuring the health and competitiveness of their company.)
What makes it unique (and expoitable) is that unlike other commodities it can produce more value than the value it was origanally bought for.
Can't other commodities such as stocks or real estate appreciate in value in a similar sort of manner?
Come, my friends. 'Tis not too late to seek a newer world -- Tennyson
Limitations
The only way workers can get what they work for is through economic and social revolution. In regards to unions and co-ops, it is true they are limited, and this in the main is due to thier reformist appearance. Existing within the capitalist system they are under the same strains and pressures as any organisation, and the same is true of any reforms they manage to achieve (constantly subjected to being reformed). If they are good for anything it is thier ability to educate the working class about thier current condition, but also to live up to thier names and begin merging with other unions and other workers organisations. This, I believe, will be the begining of socialist democracy, the people deciding how and where thier productive capabilities are employed.
They can but only in terms of capitalist exploitation. Stocks and shares equate to the same thing as private capital. The return is derived from H.L.P, only this time indirectly through a middle man (the capitalist).
Real estate, or land in general is different. The question is how does land aquire value? Essentially it boils down to a monopoly determined by supply and demand, but I'll be writing a diary on this subject soon so I don't want to go into too much detail.
"They called me mad, and I called them mad, and damn them, they outvoted me". Nathaniel Lee