reductio ad absurdum

to be self-determined is to be totally in control over one's own actions. let it be argued that people are, in fact, self-determined. This means that industrial production line workers are totally in control of their own actions. their actions, by virtue of the people being workers, are the means of production

therefore, all workers all over the world already totally control the means of production, and a worldwide marxist utopia has been realized.

as the previous conclusion is false, and the argument logically follows to the letter from one assumed premise and another premise which is necessarily true by definition, we may conclude that the assumed premise (in this case self-determination) is false.

 

means of production usually refers to non-human factors.

1.You need a tree to make pencils.
2.None of the workers own trees.

1.You need bricks to build shelter.
2.You need land to build the shelter on.
3.None of the workers own land or bricks.

ect...ect

 

... it's impossible to fully divorce the involvement of the individual worker from the means of production. without the worker, there would be no pencils, no bricks, no shelter. the worker is necessary for the means of production to operate.

 

All wealth is ultimately created by the labor necessary to produce it.

... good old fashion general strike'll get some attention...call me a dreamer

 

That's completely true, but that's not the quarrel. The problem is the workers
not owning the bricks, and the land, ect. Your model which makes an
example of the individual worker as the means of production is like pointing at
a combustion engine and calling it a car.

What about natural resources? This is like calling the big bang an act of
creation.

 

Oh, clever guy with the semantic twisting...natural resources don't just dig themselves up or cut themselves down ya know ...

 

But....natural resources don't have to do anything to be valuable...

 

Ultimately they aren't valuable until they are dug up, harvested and processed for use.
I know the money changers and commodities crooks have made this moot, but the point still stands, If you can't get anyone to do the processing and extractive work, the resource has no market value.

 

So do things become valuable when they reach sea level, or what?

 

^^^ I can't articulate this any further for you...:banghead:

 

Time is well-documented in the measurement of particular detail. Which makes chemical laws border on alchemical existences to avoid the totality of the derivation of the Actual temperature in the exhaustive form of Utility.

But against the Totally individual shape of the space of the universe it is alchemy which defines the material flux inner to the time passing.

 

word....

 

How did you like 'skip' there an hour ago? To be informed to get the curious talking with the moralistic need of others to run for cover. Like they said at the end of Casablanca: "This may be...,"

 

heeh2's automobile reference makes perfect sense. the people are not the only means of production, factory workers are not the only people involved with means of production, and every individual has their own motivations and philosophies. These facts are all that is needed to point out the logical flaws in your argument.