Anonymous #1 20h

I’m not sure you and the dictionary have the same definition for slaves

1

Anonymous enemyofmyenemy 20h

… “treat their workers LIKE slaves”. it was a simile.

6

Anonymous #1 19h

You believe the Starbucks corporation treats their employees like enslaved people

2

Anonymous enemyofmyenemy 19h

are you being insufferable and obtuse on purpose as a bit or do you just take everything literally with absolutely zero nuance or external context? 😐

9

Anonymous #1 19h

I’m asking a question. Do you believe the treatment of enslaved people and Starbucks employees are the same or very similar Or was your comment just a joke

-1

Anonymous enemyofmyenemy 19h

there is no humor. only exhaustion. godspeed to your professors.

4

Anonymous #1 19h

I didn’t graduate high school

-1

Anonymous enemyofmyenemy 19h

It’s similar in the sense that the value of your surplus labour is used to feed into capital, but different in the sense that your labour power is not bought in one lump sum, you retain ownership but rent it instead. It’s an obvious improvement over slavery in which you are treated like a literal object

3

Anonymous #3 19h

I appreciate the comment. “Surplus labor” and “labor value” are Marxist concepts. Why should I accept that these concepts exist? How would you convince me that this is the dynamic of Starbucks employees? Why are people who study business and markets not interested in these concepts?

0

Anonymous enemyofmyenemy 19h

Because they don’t teach you that workers are exploited, they teach you how to make money or analyze an economy’s metrics. I personally know your type that you wouldn’t be convinced even if I recited Marx’s research perfectly to you. For you to ever even understand these concepts, you, like I, would have to want to understand the perspective enough to actually read Capital and see what he had to say for himself. I can’t say it better than Marx can anyway

3