>>10870818>And how do you actually measure that in any individual case? In capitalism you treat labour as an open marketplace + employee protections, unions, minimum ect. In general, you pay the employee what they are willing to work for you for.That's true, thanks to unionists, socialists, and communists pushing and dying for unions, including in the US.
>If someone’s job is putting wheels on a car, how do you calculate the value of their labour in marxism?The same way you would under capitalism. I would recommend reading into the LTV yourself, but basically, value and price are two different things, value being a product's inherent value, determined by how much useful labour is put in and how intense said labour is, and price is simply what it is being sold for, but in essence different products are held as equal in value based on the labour put into them. The means of production are useless without labour, thus fundamentally making workers the only vital component of production. The worker gives the means of production value, and as they are the only fundamental unit, should receive full compensation minus the cost of resources and such to maintain. When the capitalist owns which, as it turns out, is a philosophically, logically, and morally ridiculous concept, his profit has to come from somewhere.
This is one of the fundamental bases of the Marxist critique of capitalism: i.e, how it is under capitalism.
So to address your question, value itself isn't exactly calculated but can be expressed in price. If a product is sold for $100 and its components cost $20, the worker added $80 worth of value to the product. How we calculate price depends on what kind of economy we are looking at.
>My understanding was everyone just gets paid the same amount and everyone is given a qouta of work they are expected to meet.Equality of outcome has nothing to do with Marxism. If you produce more, your labour is more valuable, thus you are compensated more.
