Labor doesn't create anything.
Sure, they put things together, but labor never creates anything.
If it was just a world of "labor", there would be nothing.
If it was just a world of engineers, it would be whole bunch of fine tuned nothing.
It takes the entrepreneur to see a need, and an idea of how to fill it.
And then that entrepreneur getting a bunch of people together to turn that idea into reality.
And then the oligarchs buy up the company and the bean counters get in charge, because they can make each thing run better (so they think) and squeeze every last cent out of it.
But, Labor doesn't create anything, and so is entitled to nothing.
Probably not what you were trying to mean, but its my pet peeve.
Yes, exactly.
We work waaaaayyyy too much.
20k hours over 30 years between 20 and 50, and we retire to the moon.
Or, we can continue playing crapitalism and bending over to those that rule by force.
I just want you know how you get the stuff that labor didn't create into a truck.
It doesn't happen.
Nothin from nothin leaves nothin
Labor is the largest cost to any company. They get the largest share of the profit. So, what are they complaining about?
The "boss" usually gets 1%, the labor gets 99%.
But the labor's share is spread out so it looks thin.
The boss' share is stacked high, so it looks fat.
But, without the entrepreneur, labor has nothing to make, and thus no pay.
This is what is coming.
And the banksters, who took a skim off of everything are laughing all the way to the bank.
I agree organized action requires coordination if chaos is not the desired result, but creating a system of haves using the havenots as slaves and sacrifices for their rituals is not the first idea I would suggest.
Here is an outline of how things might look in a world without money.