• RecluseRamble@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    10 days ago

    Why does it necessitate inequality? Don’t you “believe” in added value? Inequality may be an outcome (complete equality is hardly possible in reality anyway) but it certainly isn’t a prerequisite.

    • Redacted@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      10 days ago

      Because workers don’t receive what they put into the system in terms of effort. Profit must be made, which makes the workers unequal compared to capitalists that make the profit. Name one billionaire where their pay-to-effort ratio is worth that of say, a cleaner.

      I think most “added value” is not worth as much as is made out when contrasted the amount of profit earned by shareholders.

      I agree, complete equality is hardly possible but we’re talking about vast wealth discrepancies which prop up the global capitalist system.

      Genuinely surprised so many seemed to have missed my point here. Not sure if it’s because it came across like I was supporting a conservative (I wasn’t, just saying that their ideologies will always require some degree of inequality in wealth/happiness) or that there are more neolibrals on this sub than I assumed.

      • TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        10 days ago

        I got you. Capitalist markets require competition. Competition breeds inequality among individuals. Individuals get angry others get more ( money, attention, fame, power). Conservatives want to secure their status in society (hierarchy), and resort to authoritarianism to do it.