• YearOfTheCommieDesktop [they/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    I guess to my brain a definition based on wage labor just seems more straightforward and more clear cut, ie what WoofWoof91 said below. Here’s what I mainly found unclear:

    If you got your paychecks based on other people’s work,

    This feels wishy-washy, what counts as “based on other people’s work”? If you structured a company where the managers compensation was based on the output of the workers they supervised, would that make the manager a capitalist? Maybe I’m just misreading.

    who you have a stake in determining the way production is done

    This I actually don’t understand.

    and from your reply, I think this line is clarifying as well:

    They still need to perform their own duties and are held accountable by their own bosses.

    or to take a less descriptive approach, it seems simpler to say, capitalists are the ones who own the enterprise. Since that ownership is what gives them impunity/autonomy to do with the enterprise as they see fit. And I like WoofWoof’s comment because it also addresses the degrees of ownership (people who derive some income from owning capital, but a minority of their income)

    Sorry if this is annoying lol

    • FunkyStuff [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      11 months ago

      Don’t apologize, you’re right. The definition I gave isn’t perfect. It’s just what works for me in many cases where I’m talking with someone who is unfamiliar. But yeah, WoofWoof’s is clearer about those ambiguities in mine.