Surplus Value Is The Most Significant Concept

Marx's theory on Capitalist exploitation is an incredibly deep theory, but to explain it in a nutshell, it is that the working-class people are improperly compensated for their work. The rich, the higher-ups, they continue to expand their wealth by exploiting the working class, the Capitalist system not only allows but effectively demands that Capitalists increase their wealth, long-term or short-term, whether at the cost of the working-class or not. There are three “values” to take into consideration, the use-value, the exchange-value and the

According to Marx, surplus value is obtained in the form of profit in which the capitalist owns the means of production (private property), thus the workers have no choice but to sell their ability to work to the capitalists in order to live. This means that labor is the source of profit under capitalism. Capitalism has a historically specific relation of production, as capitalists pay for labor power (gained by paying wages) and get labor in return. The exploitation of worker’s potential through wages produces surplus value, which is the reason why capital tends to grow. Money put into capitalist relations will then grow; thereby, resulting in the creation of labor markets that give value to things we consider capital. For example, surplus value was extracted under feudalism in this order: commodities are produced (essentials of living) and then feudal lords extracted this surplus by charging rent to the serfs (sometimes through

Karl Marx witnessed first hand the rise of the industrial revolution and the beginning of capitalism. He also became one of capitalisms biggest critics. Marx believed that society needed a better way of distrusting wealth but also a better way a finding people’s full human potential or what he called “species-essence”. Marx believed that what we do connects to who we are, for example, work is what makes us human. It fulfills our species essence, as he puts it. Work allows us to be creative and flourish. However, in the 19th century Europe work did the quit opposite, it destroyed workers, particularly those who had nothing to sell but their labor. To the mill and factory owners a worker was simply an abstract idea with a stomach that needed to be filled. The workers had no choice but to work for long hours for a pathetic wage. Even worse, their labor alienated them. Alienation is a disorienting sense of exclusion and separation. Factory labor, under capitalism, alienated the workers from the product of their labor. They made stuff they couldn’t afford to buy themselves. The products they made were shipped out to other places far way to make money

Marx believed that machines were a sign of progress in society and he was not opposed to it. However, it has negatively influenced employees globally. According to Marx, these machines caused workers economic impoverishment as it impacted their wages.. The wage a worker received was influenced by the use value and exchange value of the workers labour. Marx claimed that the there is the labour commodity and the capitalist commodity. The workers exchanged their commodity, known as their labour power for the capitalist commodity, which is the money. The wages are the price of the labour that the workers put forth. Often times, they do not pay workers a quality price for what they earn or how much work they do. They are constantly looking for bargains and people who do not sell their work for much. Industry’s try their best to get inexpensive materials, enhanced machines, and cheaper wage workers in order for them to decrease the amount of money coming out of their pockets. Marx believed that due to the unavoidability of capitalism, business owners are basing their business activities solely on the attainment of profit. For that reason, workers will continue to be replaced with machines causing business owners to decrease their spending on a workers’ labor power, leading the unemployment rate to increase. Marx states that value of labour power decreases causing wages to decline.

Marx points out that the means of production are owned by only a small group of the population and most other people do not. These people who don't own the means of production (land, machinery, factories, tools, etc..) are called the proletariat and cannot sell their produce, only their labour-power... that is, they can sell hours of their time to other people. So the profits of their labour always go to those who hire them, and they are left with only a bare minimum wage.

Marx's ideas on labor value are very much alive for many organizations working for social change. In addition, it is apparent that the gap between the rich and poor is widening on a consistent basis. According to Marx, the course of human history takes a very specific form which is class struggle. The engine of change in history is class opposition. Historical epochs are defined by the relationship between different classes at different points in time. It is this model that Marx fleshes out in his account of feudalism's passing in favor of bourgeois capitalism and his prognostication of bourgeois capitalism's passing in favor of proletarian rule. These changes are not the reliant results of random social, economic, and political events; each follows the other in predictable succession. Marx responds to a lot of criticism from an imagined bourgeois interlocutor. He considers the charge that by wishing to abolish private property, the communist is destroying the "ground work of all personal freedom, activity, and independence". Marx responds by saying that wage labor does not properly create any property for the laborer. It only creates capital, a property which works only to augment the exploitation of the worker. This property, this capital, is based on class antagonism. Having linked private property to class hostility, Marx

Another concept that brought about inequality among the bourgeoisie and proletariat is the labour theory of value. As stated in the textbook Classical and Contemporary Sociological Theory, “One of the basic truths of capitalism is that it takes money to make money, and the more money a business owner has at his or her disposal, the more ability the business owner has to generate profit-making schemes” (Appelrouth and Edles: 25). In this case, the bourgeoisies are at a benefit as they own the means of production, while the proletariat are at a disadvantage as they don’t have capital to make money. Marx’s ‘general formula for capital’ explains the class and power relations that predominate in modern capitalist society through the formula M-C-M. Marx describes this law of value to be beneficial to the bourgeoisies as they increase profits and capital. Bourgeoisies are able to do this because they have the money (M) to buy capital, which converts their money into commonality (C), which they then use to produce other commodities that are sold for money (M). Bourgeoisies predominate the proletariats through power relations as the formula is inversed for the working class, C-M-C. The working class sells their labour through commodity (C), which then is exchanged for money (M) and used to buy commodities (C) necessary for survival. The C-M-C

Surplus value is created when the exchange value of a product equals more than the sum of the cost of labor and materials put into it. It is the focus of capitalism because it appears to be creating value.

In regards to the labour-capital relation within a traditional capitalist corporation Marx & Engels (2007) refer to the dialectic between the capitalists (or bourgeoisie) who own the property and the means of production and the laborers (or proletariat) who own no property and are obligated to sell their labour to the bourgeoisie to gain substance. For Marx & Engels, this labour market is inherently fraught with tension, since the interests of the capitalist and labourers are diametrically opposed, and the balance of power between capitalists and labourers tips further in the favour of the capitalists. Because workers have nothing to sell but their labour, the bourgeoisie are able to exploit them by paying them less than the true value created by their labour. Furthermore, because of the unequal positions of capitalist and labourer, labourers must work for someone else- they must do work imposed on them as a means of satisfying the needs of others. As a result, labourers inevitably experience alienation which Marx’s Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts (1844) summarizes as the separation of individuals from the objects they create, which in turn results in one’s separation from other people, from oneself, and ultimately from one’s human nature.

Marx’s analysis of capitalism begins with an investigation of the commodity because the wealth of capitalist nations is essentially “an immense collection of commodities” (Chapter 1). Marx differentiates between the use-value and the exchange-value of any given commodity. The use-value of a commodity refers to its qualitative ability to satisfy a human need, while its exchange-value is the “quantitative relation… in which use-values of one kind exchange for use-values of another kind” (Chapter 1). Therefore, exchange-value is not an intrinsic quality of a commodity; it is only discovered in comparing a fixed quantity of commodity A to a fixed quantity B. Since differing quantities of these two commodities appear to have the same value,

Marx viewed the ‘commodity’ as the most elementary form of modern wealth. The essence of the commodity is the

Marx stated that the capacity of production of the commodities was the labor power (Prychitko, Marxism 2008). Marx explained the labor power by using the Ricardo’s and Smith’s notions of the labor value and added that in order to work for feeding, sheltering and clothing, labor power heavily depended on labor’s capacities related to number of working hours (King J. E. 2006). For example, if a worker consumes commodities that took 4 hours to produce, the value of this worker is the money equal to the 4 hours of labor and the value of this worker was paid by the capitalist farmers which was the least cost that they had received.

In capitalist production, goods are produced for the market in order to get a profit. What matters for the worker, as I’ve said, is that he or she gets an adequate amount for his or her labor. What is being produced is, in this sense, immaterial.

The system of capitalism is partially based around the unpaid surplus labour of workers that allows for the generation of profit for the workers ' respective superiors. Marx argues that such a system rewards those who have some sort of domination over the workers, the actual producers of commodities. This results in terrible living

This paper is going to place the focus on the relationship between the production and destruction of value in the new economy. The aim of this paper is not only to achieve better understanding on the value in terms of it production and destruction, but also to develop comprehensive and overall picture about the management and business in the 21st century, including the potential problems and barrier confronted, in addition to its opportunities and development areas. The methodology applied in this paper is to critically evaluate the text which is closely related to this topic by thinking, learning and understanding not the information, but the complex arguments of author. Further, the comprehension will be applied to the real case when observing the concrete world of business around and viewing the phenomenon. In brief, this paper will reach the conclusion on the relationship between the production and destruction of value in the new economy.