> he's exploiting his own labor, yes, but only in his wage. the point is moot considering on top of his wage he also just owns the company and is thus entitled to its profits, but in a strictly marxist interpretation, that is correct. sounds like marxism is kinda silly. i already knew that.  > value is conferred at point of production due to the time spent on socially necessary labor. and what, pray tell, differentiates labor that is "socially necessary" from that which is not?
United States