PG is clearly confusing "capturing" a billion dollars for "earning" a billion dollars. Becoming a billionare is working the system so that the wealth generated by something people love (Amazon) is mostly captured by a select group of people (Jeff Bezos) and not the workers who are actually earning the company the value (fulfilling and delivering the packages).

▲

pclmulqdq 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

The system set up by the company is what earns the company value and creates it for others. Individual workers implement critical parts of that system, but the work of the workers does not on its own create the value. AOC and PG are both a bit obtuse about this.

	▲	pseudosavant 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		A few points. "Company" is doing some very heavy lifting in how you are using it. The "company" in that sense does not include any worker who isn't a meaningful equity participant. In Amazon's case, or Telsa/SpaceX's case, the "company" is a single founder and his cronnies. But as for `the work of the workers does not on its own create the value`... I just don't see how that isn't completely incorrect. It is literally the only part that is at the core of the value creation. How much value would be created by Amazon tomorrow if every fulfillment worker and driver didn't show up? Basically none. But Jeff Bezos could die of a heart attack tomorrow and it wouldn't stop a single dollar of value creation. We really don't appreciate the contributions of workers enough in this country. Whether it is the medical assistant at the doctor's office, the person who makes your burrito, delivers the Amazon diaper's order, or even check you out at the store. If people stop showing up to work, this all falls apart. It won't matter how much capital you have if you have no workers.

▲

hootz 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

So basically do exactly what Karl Marx says about surplus value and exploitation of work, but as the capitalist instead of the exploited worker.

	▲	pseudosavant 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		The sad reality is that it doesn't really matter which system you try to do (capitalism, communism, monarchy, etc), it is almost always the powerful exploiting the less powerful. China probably has the most successful communist government ever (in large part by selectively adopting capitalism) but it isn't like the conditions for their workers are better than in the U.S. or Europe. All this talk of "late-stage capitalism" seems to miss the mark. It is the rise of many forms of authoritarianism that is the leading cause of disregard for the needs of every day working peoples.