Great tool to radicalize people, though as marxists we shouldn't define ourselves by our direct contribution to the almighty GDP.
Some jobs don't produce a form of wealth or labour you can extract, all while still contributing to a prosperous society.
Yep, that's the entire purpose of shifting from production for Exchange-Value to production for Use-Value.
"You can't miss what you never had"
Seeing an exact number of how much is taken from your wages via taxes every time you get paid hits different than an imaginary amount of your contribution to the whole.
I'm not mad because of how much I pay in taxes, I'm mad because of how little I get in return.
If "promote the common Welfare" (I'm in the USA) were taken more seriously then I think the big green blob would largely fix itself.
I would think that that this is generally true when we zoom into a local economy. But is this true when we consider a global scale? If we were distribute the world's wealth to people in proportion to the value generated by their labor, what would the spread be like?
Does a worker in the US or a wealthy EU country receive less than the economic value/profit that they produce when we spread value fairly across the international supply chain? I suspect that workers in rich countries are able to receive more than their "fair share" for their labor by benefiting from their country's exploitation of resources and labor in poorer nations.
I am not stating this as fact. It is what I suspect, but I don't know the numbers, and I am curious to learn what others think.
A certain someone wrote a book about this international evolution of Capitalism.
