In Reply to: Re: Capitalist Family posted by Melissa McCormick on October 25, 2001 at 10:51:40:
I think the point is that paying kids a wage teaches them the basic principles of being a wage laborer. I don't think kids produce any surplus. You would have to count everything the kids get from their parents as part of their compensation and I'm sure that's more than the value of what they do for chores. But they do learn that you should sell your time for a wage and that's the key point.
: I agree with Becka. It's not communism because they aren't working together... but i'm not sure if it's capitalism either because like someone said before, you need surplus to have capitalism.... but if you think about it, if the kid doesn't buy anything, than it is a surplus because it's not going to anything essential. So the money left over (the surplus) goes to the charity....
: : What Julie said about the five year old and her grandfather doesnt strike me as communist. It seems to me that the child is offered a certain amount of money for a certain amount of work. The grandfather is the capitalist reciever, and she is the wage laborer. He does not work alongside her and therefore it is not a communal process. If it's any other system besides capitalist, my argument would be that the 5 year old was self employed taking part in a capitalist system. Any thoughts?
Post a Followup