When CEO’s of big corporates make 400 times more than other laborers, what does that measure? What does it mean? To what do we attribute the value?
There is an attributive value that associates with the distribution of income.
Big corporate, CEO pay packages support a conforming identity described by capitalists as a “natural identity.” Naturally, in order to be rewarded (like a chicken in a Skinner box), labor must yield to the identity (the attributes) of the corporate body. CEO’s are the deflators, having attributes the top income class values the most. When labor is deflated at the highest possible cost (unemployment and debt rising at an inflation-adjusted rate), the top income class is shielded from liability by the deflators. The limited liability shields “them” from the natural effects of the organized psychopathy created in their image–class warfare.
Capitalists claim that resisting the un-adjusted standard of existence (deflation by default) is unnatural. Nominally, the inflation adjustment shields “us” from them, but it really shields “them” from us. The psychopathy plays out in Ferguson, for example. We talk about race relations but not about the deflators (the inflation-adjusted, Minimum Standard of Existence–MSE) created to demand the destruction.
The difference between what is actual (nominal) and what is real (adjusted) is a philosophical argument (naturally yielding to the difference between right and wrong, which requires a Moral Intelligence Quotient–MIQ). MSE naturally yields to MIQ. It “just happens” over and over and over again to solve for “X” (the missing variable to be solved for, which although missing, has an expected value, nevertheless).
A naturally existing MIQ does not render technical measures inoperable. MIQ renders the technical description (the “objective reality”) of an MSE (a conforming confirmation). The real converges with the actual (abstracted) without the need for a technical adjustment.
Whether it’s Ferguson or Hong Kong, a minimum standard that confirms without adjustment naturally conforms to the identity of “objective reality” doesn’t it?
Keep in mind, technically speaking, as the price of crude oil continues to bust the resistance, for example, the lower it goes the more demand it reconstructs from the destruction created on command at the highest possible price.
It is no coincidence that the actual price tends to technically converge with the reality of its un-adjusted (disinflationary, on demand) existence. Notice that the price is moving down, losing support ON DEMAND.
If demand hosts the risk without the need for adjustment, why do we unnaturally labor with a deflator!
Technically speaking, when it comes to objective reality, doesn’t support always become the measure of resistance (un-abstracted) by default?
Let’s not confuse futility with dis-utility.