1) Why would a venture capitalist pay a laborer to create a product that the capitalist is going to sell for the same amount it cost to produce it?
People
can't sell things for less than they cost, or they quickly end up with nothing.
If they don't make money, they can't keep working.
And yet that's exactly what you're complaining about - the fact that nothing is free and we have to work for a living.
The capitalists sell the product at what is called a "markup." It is usually much greater than the 8/12, on average, than I included in my example.
It's not called a markup, and it's much less than what you're talking about.
Most businesses only keep about $2,500 for every $100,000 they take in. If they do well.
So one person pays another person to work, buys the materials, pays for the electricity and property tax, pays the salesmen to sell the product, pays to have the product shipped, pays for any other cost that arises, and pays for anything that breaks or goes wrong.
All of that adds up to $100,000, and if he's lucky he can sell $102,500 worth of brooms.
He does all that, employs all those people so they can feed their children, and at the same time he provides people with the best quality broom for the lowest price, because they need brooms.
And everyone participates freely of their own choice.
No one is forced to make brooms, no one is forced to buy brooms.
The workers take the job because they want it.
The customers buy the brooms because they want them.
They could make their own brooms instead,
but they would be poorer quality and cost more than the brooms from the factory.
Instead of spending several hours and multiple resources on making a broom at home,
people can buy the factory broom for less "labor hours" than it would take to make one.
And if the owner of the factory only sells $97,500 worth of brooms, he's still spent $100,000. He has to pay $2,500 of his own money just to give everyone else a job. He ends up with less money than he had when he started. But the worker still gets 100% of his pay. The salesmen get 100% of their pay. The material suppliers get 100% of their money for the wood and the straw and the metal and the stitching. The truck drivers still get paid to deliver the brooms. The repairmen get 100% of their pay for maintaining the machines at the factory.
The retail stores get to sell the brooms for more than they paid, and they use that money to pay their own employees and their own bills.
And the people who buy the brooms still get to sweep their floors, even if the man who owns the broom factory lost money.
And by the way, the factory didn't appear out of thin air.
If the man hadn't built the factory, none of those people would be able to get paid by the factory.
None of those people could afford to build a building,
and they certainly couldn't afford hundreds of thousands of dollars for the machinery.
Even if they had borrowed the money, they wouldn't have known how to build a broom factory.
And even while they're getting paid by the factory, they don't work one bit harder than they have to.
They waste time, waste money, screw things up,
and if they cause the factory to go out of business,
leaving the owner and his wife homeless and in millions of dollar of debt,
the employees just go get another job. They owe nothing.
The employees don't care, because they're only in it for the money. They're greedy and selfish.
The employees didn't help pay for the building or the machines,
but they don't mind taking the money that comes from those machines.
The employees don't even help pay for maintenance and repairs.
In fact, the employees are free to leave whenever they want, with no responsibility to the factory, while the owner might end up losing his house, or even going to jail, if the employees break the rules without his knowledge or screw up bad enough just one time. So the job pays the workers enough to buy 100% of all their needs in life, and it brings no risk or responsibility for them, while the owner risks everything he has to give them those jobs.
2) When I say laborer, I am talking about anybody in the labor pool....so, if one laborer produces broomsticks and another laborer produces mop heads they don't necessarily have to buy the exact product they produce to lose the value of their labor
"Value of their labor"?
There are 7 billion people on this planet.
If not one of those 7 billion people values your labor any more than your current employer values it, then that's probably a pretty good estimate of your labor's real value. Your paycheck gives you 100% of what you earned, and probably more than you're worth.
If you're "losing the value of your labor", then quit and get a better job.
If someone is asking too much for a broom, go buy one cheaper.
If you can make a broom or a mop at home, then make it instead of buying it.
But if you can't find a better or cheaper broom anywhere on Planet Earth,
then your whining about how it costs too much is pure garbage. Isn't it?
"This is better quality for a lower price than any human has been able to buy in all of human history. And it's oppressing me!"
3) When I am talking about the "market" I am not referring to any type of governmental structure
You're not referring to any type of reality.
4) It was asked why the laborer would work for the capitalist if the laborer could just go out and produce the product on their own....the capitalist owns the means of production....that's what makes them the capitalist.
So if the worker quits his job at the broom factory,
goes home and cuts down a tree,
and starts making brooms in his garage,
owning the tools and materials which are the means of production,
then he's suddenly transformed from a laborer into a capitalist?
HINT: He was already a capitalist when he took his paycheck every week
Therefore, the rich get richer (they own the means of production),
Unless they lose everything they own and go out of business,
which happens to rich people every day.
So...what you're saying is stupid.
and the poor get poorer
If they have nothing, how can they get any poorer than that?
It's nonsense. You're saying things that are impossible.
(they're not receiving the true value of their labor).
What does that mean?
That other humans beings are obligated to give us things, and it is our right to receive them?
Tell that to the millions of people throughout history who starved to death, or were eaten by wild animals.
None of our so-called "poor people" in the United States ever starve to death, and they never get eaten by wild animals. Do you know why? Because they're receiving the benefit of other people's labor which keeps them safe and well-fed. And the majority of all U.S. residents "under the poverty line" have more than 1 video game console, cable TV, cell phones, a different change of clothes for every day of the week, and they eat meat 3 times a day.
So the poor get richer. A LOT richer.
"Poor people" now have things that rich people didn't have 100 years ago.
Because poor people have consistently gotten richer in the free market system.
And they don't even have to work.
Basically, they live like kings.
They can eat and get drunk and have sex and consume entertainment,
all day and all night,
and they never have to lift a finger for anyone else.
So the people who "own the means of production" go to work every day and pay for "poor people" to party. In other words, the factory owner is a slave who is forced to work for the enjoyment of the privileged class who receive "welfare" tribute appeasement money.
Now, I have no opinion on which economic system is best....I'm just pointing out some facts to explain why the gap between the very rich and the very poor is increasing. That's all.
You think rich people get their money from poor people.
If that doesn't sound like a joke to you, then you have serious problems.
