Blogging stupidity: Marxism

MarxismI have both expressed my general dissatisfaction with blogs and my growing admiration with some of the refreshingly unique and intelligent blogs I have stumbled upon. Unfortunately, there still seems to be far more idiocy out there in the “blogosphere” than actual intelligent life. I took some time to search through blogs and while not all were full of idiots, several were. One blog was so utterly stupid that I felt the need to address it here.

“Libby Spencer” provided this idiocy:

The disturbing trend of forcing more productivity while cutting wages and benefits for the working class continues to grow. Obviously, with the weak economy the owners have the upper hand over hourly employees who are forced to choose between the cuts and having no job at all.

I wrote something last year (imported into The Asylum after the fact) which briefly mentions what truly drives an economy; productivity. A job that doesn’t produce anything of value is virtually worthless to an economy. Let’s say they are employing someone to do a worthless job with taxpayer dollars. What good does that do the economy? There’s no real difference from just getting welfare and it’s far worse than going out and getting a privately funded job (since private entities are driven by productivity).

When I see someone decry increased productivity, I feel like I’ve entered some bizarre universe in which the laws of nature have been reversed. Of course, I’ve simply entered the world of Marxism. The idiot in question seems to have a serious problem with common sense economics. If you are able to do more with less, you are increasing productivity and as such making yourself more competitive in the world. The “upper hand” in question is that of being able to give employment to someone during a period of extremely high unemployment. This is a bad thing? Having a job in the private sector and being forced into being “productive” is now a bad thing?

Libby doesn’t end with that though:

Interestingly, one rarely sees cuts reaching the executive offices. I would bet if we had a rule that the highest paid person in any organization couldn’t draw compensation more than 30% higher than the lowest paid employee, management would find better ways to balance the books than on the backs of those who work the hardest to deliver what often turn out to be record profits.

The author is providing a Marxist logical fallacy, that merely working hard brings quality productivity. This is not the case. Furthermore, the author decries productivity, yet alludes to record profits. Profitability is built on productivity and yes, hard work is important, but skilled labor is the key. In a large business, it takes quality upper management to turn a profit, not just a group of hard working people. There is a reason people are just laborers and this is most likely because they lack the skill to do more. Take General Motors for example, we see a company’s workers (union) with a great deal of power over the company, bring it to the point of ruin. The workers role is far less significant (on a individual basis) than that of those actually steering the company. If one likens a car to a business, Marxism would consider every part of the engine as being equal to the driver. Granted, if you remove most of those parts the car would not drive, however, the driver has a far greater responsibility. Which is of more value, Michael Schumacher or a fuel pump? I’d wager that the fuel pump works more tirelessly…

The idiocy about “compensation more than 30% higher than the lowest paid employee” is just more Marxism Michael Schumacher surely put a lot of effort into his racing, however, he’s not the only driver to put forth effort. Yet, Schumacher has earned hundreds of millions of dollars. There are many professional drivers that make meager wages. Is this due to some great inequity? Or, it is because Schumacher happened to be one of the very best in the world at what he did? When you start to suggest that people should make virtually the same amount, no matter what, you say that skill does not matter. This leads down a path of decreased productivity and the working class tends to suffer as the entire economy tanks. Everyone suffers when you fail to recognize skill and ability, instead focusing on effort.

I’m far from anti-worker. I simply believe in a truly free market and several limited government interference. Some see the private employer portrayed as the evil entity, yet ignore the long arm of the government leeching from us at every turn. The private entity provides productive jobs and the government is a leech sucking away the life. I know firsthand of two examples of an employer paying out 25 USD an hour to to hire workers. In one instance, the workers actually make $10 an hour, the rest vanishes into taxes, fees, benefits, etc… In the other instance, the employee makes $18 (without benefits). This is the norm, it doesn’t even give us pause. Is $25 an hour not perfectly reasonable pay for a relatively un-skilled worker? If we truly removed all the burdens from private business, there would be more competition, wages would go up, productivity would go up and virtually everyone would be far better off. If you want to see a contrast, look at how well off the worker actually is within a Marxist society. I’ll take my capitalistic greed thank you very much.

  • Share/Bookmark

Possibly related posts:

  1. It’s not the jobs, stupid!
  2. GETTING LAID

5 Comments

  1. Chaos
    Posted August 6, 2010 at 2:25 pm Permalink

    Ok, now go back to work!

  2. Posted August 6, 2010 at 6:14 pm Permalink

    The US has now become a “service economy”, and other countries have surpassed us as manufacturing centers. This is partially due, as you mention, to government interference…like paying benefits to illegal aliens.

  3. Posted August 6, 2010 at 10:01 pm Permalink

    Government interference, unions (which deprive the worker of independence), and of course things like waste and lack of productivity. It’s virtually impossible to fully appreciate how much the government is to blame though, they are so ever-present in the role that they play. It’s like living with a conjoined twin. Do the twins even fully appreciate the limitations placed upon them?

    Wait, the government is worse than a conjoined twin. The government is like having a retarded and lazy conjoined twin that is relying on your internal organs.

  4. Donavon Pfeiffer
    Posted August 10, 2010 at 11:47 am Permalink

    I work in an engineering support capacity in a semiconductor manufacturing facility. During this economic downturn I have seen education benefits removed, forced vacations and several other reductions in benefits to direct hourly employees. There were also forced vacations for indirect labor.
    Many of these benefits were offered as a way to encourage hiring during a competitive job. It no longer exists. Yes, employers do have the upper hand right now as there is a surplus of labor. That’s the way a market works.
    I’ve heard some of my fellow employee’s saying, “There should be a law to stop this from happening.” I have argued that if our state wasn’t so anti business, this wouldn’t happen as there would be competition for our services. That in fact the laws we have have indeed helped bring about this very situation. I can’t seem to win this one even when I point out that such a law would only force the company to move our jobs somewhere else.
    We have gotten a our education benefits back. And we have had a recent blood letting in middle management as “lean” manufacturing apparently includes lean management. We also appear to be headed for a decent incentive payout this year as increased productivity is leading to increased profitability which is to be shared with the workers oddly enough./sarcasm

  5. Posted August 11, 2010 at 7:42 am Permalink

    The greatest irony to me is the workers seeming willingness to go down with the ship, provided things are “fair”. This goes all the way to the squalor workers tend to exist in, within communist systems (Chaos just put up a story about migrant workers living in bathrooms, at least their government isn’t starving them right now), to unions bringing a entire company to the brink of destruction (and beyond true viability, relying on federal funds).

    Ironically, the workers also seem more than willing to tie themselves to current jobs and deprive themselves of freedom by demanding so many work related benefits that leaving becomes far less viable. A truly robust free market system would provide amazing opportunities for a truly free worker, yet there is a tendency amongst the less motivated to wish for security over opportunity.

Post a Comment

Your email is never shared. Required fields are marked *

*
*