On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 11:36 AM, Shane Mage <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Jan 26, 2014, at 12:15 PM, raghu wrote:
> > I think Marxist theory provides an entirely satisfactory account of
> > why owners would seek to work their laborers as long and hard as
> > they can.
> >
> > But the article at the head of this thread shows that that owners do
> > this not just to the laborers, but even to their own kind. *That* is
> > much harder to explain in terms of the objective interests of the
> > owners of capital.
>
> Wall Street traders and dealers ("analyst" here is a euphemism) are
> not the owners of capital nor "their own kind." They are parasites and
> carrion-feeders playing against each other in a zero-sum game whose
> "obscene" financial awards represent small change to the owners of
> capital.
Wall St dealers, consultants and upper-management types pose a bit of a
taxonomical challenge in the labor-capital divide, but in my mind, they
sure as hell aren't workers, so I'd say they are owners.
And some of the big hitters on Wall St are billionaires and it doesn't seem
accurate to characterize the lot as small-time bottom-feeders either.
At its peak, I believe the financial sector accounted for something like
45% of all corporate profits in the US, which is hardly small change by any
measure.
-raghu.
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
