From: Barney-AT-pseud.pseud
Subject: M-INTRO: Re: Why? Owners vs. Workers.
Date: Fri, 05 Oct 2001 17:56:28 -0600


       I am also very interested in the response that a Marxist would give 
to the question asked by Grumpy. What would Mark himself say about the 
owners of businesses reaping most or nearly all of the benefits of a 
venture. Would he believe that the owners were exploiting the poor workers 
who were being used simply as another warm body on the assembly lines of the 
great and profitable corporation, while the owner, doing "relatively 
nothing" could sit back and spend all of the money that poured in due to the 
labor of the workers?
	It is true that sometimes workers can be exploited, and are paid a salary 
that is not what they feel their work merits.  I lived in the Dominican 
Republic for two years and I saw many assembly workers and laborers in the 
factories owned by great American Enterprises, who were paid barely enough 
to survive. I have seen how these companies could have afforded to pay their 
workers more, but chose to use their profits in other ways.  This may seem 
extremely unfair that they are paid so little when the owners and investors 
live like kings. The fact is, however, these people are being paid what the 
companies feel their labors are worth.  Most of the people who are working 
in those positions are not capable of starting, funding, running, or 
managing a corporation, and so they are forced to work on the lines. To 
them, the job they have, given their skills and abilities, is probably as 
good as they can get. If not, they should improve their education, skills, 
or whatever they feel would help them land a better job.
	My personal beliefs coincide somewhat with those of Betty, and from what I 
can tell, those of Grumpy. I see Che's point, that workers may come up with 
ideas that may advance the companies and make them a lot of money. The 
problem is, that if the workers were so ingenious and could do things so 
much better, they would go out and take all of the risks, go through all of 
the hassle and hard work, and start their own businesses. The way I see it 
is people often don't realize everything that goes into starting, growing, 
and running a company. Or, they just don't want to go to all of the work. 
Either way, if a person comes up with a good idea that will make the company 
a little more money, I agree they should be compensated.  But at the same 
time without all of the other aspects of the business to build on, their 
idea on its own would not make any money. They depend on the organization 
for which they work, and they will be paid according to what they are worth 
to the company. If the company needs a person and their great ideas, they 
will be paid more. If not, they will be paid less. Is this unfair?
	How would Marx suggest companies be efficient and fair, while at the same 
time giving people the incentives to start, grow and advance companies?

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp



     --- from list marxism-intro-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---