Rep. Steve King compares workers to commodities like beans and corn

Steel is not a raw material. Iron is... Coke is... but Steel must be manufactured.. Please go back to Metallurgy Class. It is an input.

Steel is a raw material for vehicle manufacture.

The only inputs are Land which contains raw materials and anything derived from nature, Labor, Capital which are the manufactured goods used in production and Enterprise. This isn't metallurgy, it's economics. Learn the terms and understand what they define.

All commodities come under Land. Labor by definition isn't a commodity.

That's a bullshit thought process. If Steel were a naturally occurring product, I'd agree... but it's not. It has to be produced before it even comes close to an Auto plant. Is it a Material? Yes... but it's nowhere near "RAW". Automobiles are DEPENDENT upon Steel Manufacturers... therefore it is an INPUT.

What kind of input is it? Is it Land, Labor, Capital or Enterprise?
 
Steel is not a raw material. Iron is... Coke is... but Steel must be manufactured.. Please go back to Metallurgy Class. It is an input.

You might be the biggest ignoramus on this board.
Iron is not a raw material, as it is refined from ore. Neither is coke, as it is refined from coal.
But all of them are commodities, just like labor.

Well, I thought that was a given, skippy... but thanks for explaining it to the "less informed". I grew up in Coal Country Pennsylvania and I live there still. My father worked in a Steel Mill.. so perhaps I was assuming too much from the folks on the board, My apologies.

You thought it was a given that steel is not a raw material because it is made from something else, but iron is a raw material, even though it's made from something else?
In other words you thought people here were as stupid as you are?
 
You might be the biggest ignoramus on this board.
Iron is not a raw material, as it is refined from ore. Neither is coke, as it is refined from coal.
But all of them are commodities, just like labor.

Well, I thought that was a given, skippy... but thanks for explaining it to the "less informed". I grew up in Coal Country Pennsylvania and I live there still. My father worked in a Steel Mill.. so perhaps I was assuming too much from the folks on the board, My apologies.

You thought it was a given that steel is not a raw material because it is made from something else, but iron is a raw material, even though it's made from something else?
In other words you thought people here were as stupid as you are?


Ok Slick 50.... Iron is an element.. FE... it doesn't get any less RAW than that. You, my friend... are a fucking moron.
 
King is simply stating out loud what all too many of the people running the GOP at present believe. To them, anyone working for a living, whether with their hands or their minds, are not truly human. To be human, they, like their hero, Ayn Rand, believe that you have to be totally amoral and take from others without giving anything in return.

King, and those like him are the enemies of all that work for a living in this nation. From the school janitor to the scientist in our great institutions of learning, King despised them all.

Just ask the folks in Wisconsin.
 
Well, I thought that was a given, skippy... but thanks for explaining it to the "less informed". I grew up in Coal Country Pennsylvania and I live there still. My father worked in a Steel Mill.. so perhaps I was assuming too much from the folks on the board, My apologies.

You thought it was a given that steel is not a raw material because it is made from something else, but iron is a raw material, even though it's made from something else?
In other words you thought people here were as stupid as you are?


Ok Slick 50.... Iron is an element.. FE... it doesn't get any less RAW than that. You, my friend... are a fucking moron.
Wow, you really are stupid stupid stupid.
How is Iron Refined from Ore?
 

The idea of Labor as a commodity is the single most destructive falsehood in what passes for current economic science. The social credit theorists of 80 years ago explained well where acceptance of this idea was leading before the First Great Depression. They still have the answer when folk have had their fill of the Second.

RWers don't subscribe to science.

What they do subscribe to, however, is staunch RW ideology which is akin to a religion.

They just know certain things to be true. They can just feel it in their guts.

If you agree with an opinion it is science? Can you explain what qualifies his statement as science?
 
Wrong as usual Marc. We know what we see, what we experience...and understand why with a certain thought process involved...
Indeed, devoid of objective evidence, with disregard to facts which conflict with rightist dogma. You know you don’t like what you see and experience, your thought process exists in the context of conservative ideology; to you it’s ‘real.’

That you’re sincere in your beliefs isn’t at issue; at issue is the right’s refusal to consider data in an objective, comprehensive manner.

Present some type of data. So far the only person that has even tried to present an actual argument ended up defining commodities in ways that make things that are definitely commodities into something else. The rest of you sit around pontificating about how ignorant anyone who disagrees with you are, and claim that we deny factual evidence.

That might win arguments in thrid grade, but it doesn't work in the real world.
 
A commodity is something sold by price. Labor is exactly that. It doesn't matter whether the person running a machine is a PhD in Physics or a high school grad, assuming they are equally competent at the task. The determining factor for who gets the job is the price of labor, i.e. wage.

Without this understanding it is no wonder Lefties cannot grasp basic concepts.

A good or a service is something sold by price. A commodity is something that has reached the equilibrium point to where the products are so identical as to make not difference who the producer is and trades strictly on price, as quality and services are identical.

Right there, labor is not a commodity as quality and service are rarely identical. Labor is a highly differentiated market. What you are talking about is the wage paid for a particular job. Which is again, highly differentiated across markets. Consider the fast-food worker. In my city the fast-food worker will begin at minimum wage in the inner-city and minimum-wage plus 2-3 if hired in the outer suburbs. If labor were a commodity, their wage rates would be the same at all fast-food places around the nation, right?

People that don't understand the economic definition of a word shouldn't use it when discussing economic issues.

I have supplied the definition of commodity twice already, and marvel that you only look at the part that makes your argument, and ignore the part that contradicts it.

Commodity - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
No, they are not inputs of production.


Inputs of production are Land, Labor, Capital and Enterprise.

Commodities are raw materials used in production.

My eco 101 prof would be failing the both of you for this fundamental misunderstanding of economics. Especially if you called money, Capital.

no offense mom, but your sole contribution here has been some hacked un-attributed wiki entry's and some verbiage I cannot even translate.... I love Ur avatar though, so, have a nice day ok...;)

I'm sure anyone on the board that has taken an introduction to econ can confirm the validity of the terminology at wiki.

Feel free to counter with any source you can discover that states the inputs of production are anything other than Land, Labor, Capital and Enterprise. Or that a commodity is anything other than a good if speaking in economic terms.

Like this one?

The inputs or resources used in the production process are called factors of production by economists. The myriad of possible inputs are usually grouped into five categories. These factors are:


Production theory basics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
now that you marxists have had your Oblast comm. meeting, let me share this with you,King is right, labor IS a commodity...


das kapital and the clayton act, bon voyage!!!!!

Unless you form a union and seize your fair share of the wealth created by the sweat of your brow. For it will never freely be given to you.

You're right, it will never be given to you. But that's the beauty of capitalism, you can rise up and take it whenever feel you want to put in the work and sacrifice. And the best part is, you don't have to pay union dues to do it.


So says the corporate heads, who enjoy the FACT that the majority of their employees will not have the time or resources to gain the additional knowledge necessary to become an equal while working for them (aka creating the basis for their wealth).

Sorry, but there is NO excuse or justification for the heinous attitudes displayed by King.....if you accept that shit, you might as well be a "subject" instead of a citizen, and toss out various parts of the Constitution and Bill of Rights.....then pray your employer doesn't decide to eliminate the 5 day work week, the 8 hour day, lunch breaks, etc., etc.
 
I'm sure anyone on the board that has taken an introduction to econ can confirm the validity of the terminology at wiki.

Feel free to counter with any source you can discover that states the inputs of production are anything other than Land, Labor, Capital and Enterprise. Or that a commodity is anything other than a good if speaking in economic terms.

"Enterprise" is meaningless babble. When I took macro economics, they didn't mention it. The economic definition of "land" includes everything that comes from land. That includes minerals such as oil, coal, copper, iron and aluminum. It also includes stuff found growing on the land, such as lumber.

If you took economics, then you must have failed it, because you sure don't know what the hell you are talking about.
 
I completely agree with everything he said.

The government has no right to force a private business to pay any form a base pay.

It's tyranny and of course, the left supports tyranny over hard work, and earning a bigger check.

This outrage at being called a commodity is fake, and you are all lying when you claim what he said was offensive.

Right, because YOU would just love for your boss to tell you that you have NO sick days, you'll work as long as he tells you to, he can fire you just because he doesn't like your face or your religion or the baseball team you support, and he can pay you whatever he damned well pleases....because if you don't like it, you can go shop around to other bosses who might give their wage slaves a slightly better deal.

What YOU want is the USA before the New Deal and unions gave YOU the life style that you are accustomed to. Get real.
 
Ahh... but what if that "surplus" of employment was artificially generated by Corporate Greed? What if, in fact that surplus of employment became possible by exploiting a slave labor market in a KNOWN Communist country and other Socialistic ones, while at the same time slandering and demonizing American Citizens as Socialist and Communists who are intelligent enough to call these TRAITORS to task?


I know... It's called the Koch Brothers and the Tea Party.

BWAHAHAHA!!!

Man, you are soooo funny!

What if the sky was pink and unicorns actually existed?
 
Of course they do.... That's the REAL basis of Capitalism. Those with the CAPITAL win, those without, lose.

Why do you think it's called CAPITALIZING on someone else's misfortune?

That's why the country was DESIGNED to have elements of Capitalism AND Socialism built into it. Too much power either way is guaranteed misery.

I bet you claim you aren't a commie, don't you?
 
Those complaining about Capitalism are either too stupid to capitalize on it or too stupid to know when they already have.

No, people are criticizing a POS politician who wants to erradicate everything that the New Deal and unions have done to give folk like you the ability to have disposable time and money to goof around on then internet. Amazing how folk like you continually support those who are against your best interest.
 
I disagree. A minimum price floor does not create an ipso facto declaration of fungibility. And that price floor is NOT in effect for all labor ie waitstaff, sales staff, farm labor, etc etc The labor of the brain surgeon and the sewer worker are not identical. The union doesn't sell labor, it only acts as a representitive of the individuals that do. All the monies in a union contract go to the individual workers, there is no profit for the entity "union".

Unions do get money out of contracts.

Coffee that is dug out of the shit of a weasel is the most expensive in the world. That does not make coffee not a commodity, does it?

You seem to think that just because some people can avoid the general commodity market that invalidates the commodity market for everyone else. The fact is that a commodity is a little harder to define than simply to say that it has no differentiation across a market.

Commodity - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Unions get money from dues. Those dues are in force without regard to a contract. Show me a union contract where money is paid directly to the union for the union itself, not the membership. Without a potential for profit/loss, there is no "sale".

Weasel shit coffee is it's own market, gourmet coffees. Labor is not a commodity to be bought, sold and traded for profits/losses. Labor is an input, like land and capital. There can be no production without labor. Commodities are those things produced by labor.

Basic economics.


Which is ignored by the willfully ignorant neocon toadies that blissfully kiss the ass of people like King...because they are deluded enough to think that their personal lives would NOT be adversely affected should the mindset of King take hold of our gov't.....as if they are in some separate bubble from the rest of society.
 
A commodity is something sold by price. Labor is exactly that. It doesn't matter whether the person running a machine is a PhD in Physics or a high school grad, assuming they are equally competent at the task. The determining factor for who gets the job is the price of labor, i.e. wage.

Without this understanding it is no wonder Lefties cannot grasp basic concepts.

A good or a service is something sold by price. A commodity is something that has reached the equilibrium point to where the products are so identical as to make not difference who the producer is and trades strictly on price, as quality and services are identical.

Right there, labor is not a commodity as quality and service are rarely identical. Labor is a highly differentiated market. What you are talking about is the wage paid for a particular job. Which is again, highly differentiated across markets. Consider the fast-food worker. In my city the fast-food worker will begin at minimum wage in the inner-city and minimum-wage plus 2-3 if hired in the outer suburbs. If labor were a commodity, their wage rates would be the same at all fast-food places around the nation, right?

People that don't understand the economic definition of a word shouldn't use it when discussing economic issues.

I have supplied the definition of commodity twice already, and marvel that you only look at the part that makes your argument, and ignore the part that contradicts it.

Commodity - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Where in your supplied definition does it ever imply that labor is a commodity?
 
I'm sure anyone on the board that has taken an introduction to econ can confirm the validity of the terminology at wiki.

Feel free to counter with any source you can discover that states the inputs of production are anything other than Land, Labor, Capital and Enterprise. Or that a commodity is anything other than a good if speaking in economic terms.

"Enterprise" is meaningless babble. When I took macro economics, they didn't mention it. The economic definition of "land" includes everything that comes from land. That includes minerals such as oil, coal, copper, iron and aluminum. It also includes stuff found growing on the land, such as lumber.

If you took economics, then you must have failed it, because you sure don't know what the hell you are talking about.

Enterprise is the putting together of the other three to make a product. You can't make a product if there is no force to put the three together.

So, in your econ class, is labor a commodity or an input?
 
no offense mom, but your sole contribution here has been some hacked un-attributed wiki entry's and some verbiage I cannot even translate.... I love Ur avatar though, so, have a nice day ok...;)

I'm sure anyone on the board that has taken an introduction to econ can confirm the validity of the terminology at wiki.

Feel free to counter with any source you can discover that states the inputs of production are anything other than Land, Labor, Capital and Enterprise. Or that a commodity is anything other than a good if speaking in economic terms.

Like this one?

The inputs or resources used in the production process are called factors of production by economists. The myriad of possible inputs are usually grouped into five categories. These factors are:


Production theory basics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Raw Materials are grouped under Land.

Machinery is Capital.

Again, at no point will you find any professional economist classify labor as a commodity.

An idiot politician like King maybe.
 
No, they are not inputs of production.


Inputs of production are Land, Labor, Capital and Enterprise.

Commodities are raw materials used in production.

My eco 101 prof would be failing the both of you for this fundamental misunderstanding of economics. Especially if you called money, Capital.

no offense mom, but your sole contribution here has been some hacked un-attributed wiki entry's and some verbiage I cannot even translate.... I love Ur avatar though, so, have a nice day ok...;)

I'm sure anyone on the board that has taken an introduction to econ can confirm the validity of the terminology at wiki.

Feel free to counter with any source you can discover that states the inputs of production are anything other than Land, Labor, Capital and Enterprise. Or that a commodity is anything other than a good if speaking in economic terms.

There is an inherent danger in using Wiki-pedia as a source during a discussion due to it's vulnerability to any yahoo editing it without accountability. One has to carefully check what is being said and if that statement has valid documentation.

That being said, your challenge to Trajan is quite valid. It's one thing to say something is wrong, it's another to prove it. If Trajan can factually/logically prove that the statements you used from Wiki are not supported by valid, respected economist, then he has a valid point. If not, then he's just blowing Trajan smoke.
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top