> What makes someone "exploited"?

According to Marx it's basically always you are selling your time/labor for money because you are paid less than the value of the labor. The employer keeps the surplus.

▲

pas 11 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Employer (the capitalist) also takes the risks, blablabla.

Probably a better framework would be to look at the power imbalance in the respective labor market. Is the employer incentivized to hire people even at a relatively high wage, because there's competitive pressure from other employers? Do people have enough savings (and unemployment payments or other safety nets) to be able to find a good job? (Even relocate if necessary.)

Company towns were bad, and small rural towns with only one big employer also exhibit similar problems.

Where are scientists in this model? Do they have ample of opportunities? Are they simply settling for a low pay because they really really like their niche work?

	▲	tpm 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> Is the employer incentivized to hire people even at a relatively high wage That doesn't matter in that particular theory (I'm not a marxist, just explaining). The employees are always exploited like a natural resource. > Company towns were bad, and small rural towns with only one big employer also exhibit similar problems. Well the funny thing is Marx advocated for that in the Communist Manifesto. He might have been a good philosopher but the solutions he proposed weren't very successful.

▲

gruez 11 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

It's probably worth mentioning that Marx's labor theory of value is not taken seriously by mainstream economists.

	▲	AngryData 7 hours ago \| parent [-]
		To be fair economists don't agree on many things and even the most mainstream theories are regularly challenged as inadequate and ineffective at explaining past and current economic trends and bad at guiding policy changes and decisions.