Reduction Problem?

In capital marx says that skilled labor can be reduced to a larger quantity of unskilled labor. How does this work exactly? How many hours of unskilled labor is one hour of skilled labor? He doesn't seem to talk about it again.

The skills necessary to perform skilled labor require unskilled labor to create (eg. study, apprenticeships, OJT, etc.). Thus, when it comes down to it, skilled labor possesses within itself a definite quantity of unskilled labor.

Hey, you're reading the book! Good on you.

posting this here because it was drowned out in the other thread
is it not true then that 1 hour of my labor time (if I'm young and efficient) is worth more than 1 hour of your labor time (if you are old and slow)?
do I not add "more value" than you do to society with the same quantity of work?

He lived in the industrial time where labour meant doing things with muh hands. He couldn't imagine labour requiring intellectual exercises that cannot be quantified. A bunch of morons aren't going to do as well a job at NASA one intelligent guy simply because they "have more time".

Do you even think about your own posts? Do you really believe there were no mathematicians or other intellectuals in the 19th century? How about the work Marx himself was doing in writing this very book? Think about the inane shit you spout for 2 seconds before you post it.

This.

Also, skilled labor tasks can be generalized as substitutes for unskilled labor. For instance, the small amount of skilled labor that goes into designing/building/maintaining/operating a tractor substitutes for the large amount of unskilled labor needed for a team to haul things. Even something like the skilled labor of a physician can be conceptualized as the replacement for however many quality-adjusted years of life among less skilled workers they save through their medical treatment.

FUCKING RETARD, THIS IS COMMUNISM NO ONE PERSON IS MORE VALUABLE THAN ANYONE ELSE OTHER THAN THE OLIGARCHS THE SYSTEM ULTIMATELY PRODUCES, EVERY SINGLE TIME, ALMOST LIKE IT WAS DESIGNED WITH KNOWLEDGE THAT WHOEVER IS GRANTED THE POWER TO WILL ABUSE IT.

take your meds

No because the value of labour is determined by the SNLT. But since you are more productive, you are effectively working more SNLT hours than the less productive worker.
You're still paid the same, though. Be more lazy.

Sobriety of all forms is enlightening, you should try it. I will reiterate though, communism is designed with a thorough knowledge and understanding of the base emotions that drive the human. It as a system that will always create a slave force and an over class with nothing in between, this is what it was designed to do and will always play out this way, it sounds appealing to the uninitiated because they don't have this understanding and are still projecting the darker parts of the psyche onto the world whilst believing themselves holier than what their projections.

Go away, schizo

Karl Marx was in Britain at the time they were inventing the worlds first computer, what planet are you on where that doesn't involve intellegence?

no educated response, I thought you guys pride yourself on your intellect, in reality you are all completely emotionally and philosophically retarded, I will leave but I make one suggestion before I leave, take a break from literature that nurtures your echo chamber, read The Art of War to learn how you have been subverted and protect your self from further subversion and then read the Dhammapda to help you realise that if you want to make a change in the world you need to change yourself not place further control on how society functions.

An infinite amount of monkeys in front of keyboards though

This is one of the few gorilla threads I can admit I like because this is a good question and I didn't know the answer. Marx should touch upon this more often.

Karl Marx is outdated. He wrote about the world he lived in, which is different to the modern wold.
The most obvious thing is that during Marx day, you needed money to make money.
Today some of the more successful businesses started from scratch. You no longer need to purchase land and a factory to begin your company, you can do it with a friend from your room over the internet.

tl;dr Karl Marx and his works are a product of the time they were written in, and shouldn't be treated like holy texts.

You understand that Marx's theories are primarily about general production of commodities? Do you understand that your statement bears no relevance anyway?

This.

Basically think about it like this:
To become skilled, lots of unskilled work has to be done. You are producing your own skill, you are your own commodity. The value of skilled labour can thus be expressed in unskilled labour if you know what went into making the skilled labour, and what its deprecation is.

That sounds a lot like modern real life.

Yeah dude I'm going to make a FreeWebs.com website that will get popular af and get me a lot of money using my laptop (that costs money but somehow I have it without money), using the Wi-Fi of McDonalds.

Without money shit is impossible you either have to steal or be given.

"Without money" in this context meaning "without having to have had inherited or murdered for money", like Marx writes. Did you read his shit?
Today you can make money on your own, with your labor and cheap licenses/tech. It is easy to start your own business, and affordable. You don't need factories or machinery that costs more than you earn in a lifetime, unlike during his day.

Everything about this post is wrong.

You can also make money on your own in the days of Marx.
You could work in a factory.
Or become a whore.
Or move to america where land was free. (which you cant do anymore now)

Tell me more about how I can start a manufacturing business without a big loan.
Hard mode: "Just make facebook/Win the lottery" is not an acceptable answer.
Very hard mode: Freelancing is not an answer because that is just working for somebody else at comparable or lower wages than an employed person

Thats renting our your labor. You could always do that.
The point is you can make your own business today, and it doesn't require a huge initial investment like in Marx day.

Proofs
Hard mode: "invent google/win a lottery" still isnt a valid answer.

I feel like our silicon valley cuck buddy here doesnt realise that any tech startup today, even if they are purely software, need massive investments from venture capitalists and cant just "do it on your own". This is just the same as going to the bank and getting a loan to open a shop or build an assemblyline.

There is a large spectrum of "i have money" between begging on the street and inventing Google, you fucking retard.
Even the people podcasting or streaming video games make a buck when they have any talent.
Low initial investment, your own boss, hobby turned into a job. Think for 2 seconds before posting.

Wew ok lad so entertainers making content on a website that takes a share to promote it is vastly different from in marx days, where good singers and actors had to go to promoters and then tour the country.

Yeah youre right so much has changed. A few entertainers working for donations and income from ads from corporate sites really showed me that its so different from the past.

Yes, advertisement is vastly different from Marx days, because everyone can do it and not just the top singers.
If you actually read any of Marx theory and labor theory of value you would see how hard advertisement breaks it, since it takes zero labor to increase the market cost of a good tremendously.

Is every poster here just Youtube educated?

It's still though as nails to get out of extreme poverty.

But yea I agree that on the point (which you didn't made) that Labor isn't as close to slavery as it used to be. But you know why right? because of socialist theory during the industrial revolution and post-industrial revolution.
Progress is being made but it's all thanks to the theory that the Young Hegelians left, not even shitting you. If that group of friends didn't gathered up to forge their theory then Capitalism would be even purer, purer in the sense that Capitalism would play a bigger role in nations, untamed Capitalism is corporate tyranny, and corporate tyranny is basically feudalism/aristocracy.

No. It's easy to work for someone, sell your labor for a wage. But starting your own business from scratch with 0 money ain't easy at all buddy, for everything you need tools and even then even if it's a great idea you got no way of confirming it's going to be popular.
Are you really saying that the system is fair? are you a retarded conservative/liberal?

Steve Jobs and Mark Succ didn't start from 0 just so you know. They were already from rich families when they started.

Anyway. The only way I see some one broke making it is only in a few ways: He is popular as fuck, well liked by everyone so thanks to the love people have for him he gets helped out, everyone buys from him for the same reason personal popularity no matter in which economic system will always be a great trait.
Another is joining a mafia and not getting killed.
Joining a worker union.
Joining a commune.

Most of these are not even Capitalism except the Mafia. But good luck not getting used as a pawn, you will get money quick but will probably die quick too.

...

Hell we're already in Corporate Tyranny in that dystopian cyberpunk "future". Capitalism was let to grow to the huge cancer tumor it is now. Each passing day the stronger & more despotic rulers get. Eventually it goes back to Monarchs and Fiefs.

Read Hoppe, ancaps already are asking for monarchy to be revived, been doing so for a good decade.

I know but won't happen, thankfully progress won't go backwards as to become an de-progress. Stirner predicted what is happening rn thankfully. For my own benefit I find the "absolutism", the power of "the people" more convenient. I prefer the merciful "tyranny" of the proletariat way more than the unmerciful tyranny of the state or corporations or state & corporations at the same time (USA).

Only good post in this reply chain.

Bankruptcy in lieu of debtors' prison? Thank socialists. Minimum wage in lieu of chits and company stores? Thank socialists. Public schooling in lieu of child labor? Thank socialists. Antitrust regulations in lieu of ancap "free companies" like East India or Hudson Bay? Thank socialists. Welfare and workers comp in lieu of regular famine and death at the slightest mishap? Thank socialists. Without socialist agitation, even the limited ability we currently enjoy to chart our own course in life today would be little better than under feudalistic bonded serfdom.

Regarding the rest of the other guy's hogwash, of course there were small businesses, entrepreneurial startups, inventors, freelancers, venture capitalists, and small business loans from banks back then. The main thing that's changed is people don't have to lean their nose so hard against the grindstone every moment from cradle to grave, allowing more people a tiny bit more room to pursue our own ambitions.