It is said that there is this classical distinction between labour and capital. In this vision labourers tend to do jobs that are dirty, physically demanding and mentally exhausting. Capitalists on the other hand are said to be exploiting labourers. I have become interested in this topic, as I look for a fulfilling occupation of my life. I feel that it is my moral obligation to get as much out of my physical talents as possible. When contemplating these matters, I came to the conclusion that I do not want to end my life, knowing that I only have laboured products. As a labourer thus. At the same time, I wonder what makes a labourer any different from a capitalist, and whether it makes any sense at all to label humans as labourers and capitalists or not.

First, let us define the capitalist. So far, we know that capitalists bring in the money that pays for capital goods and salaries. They have an excess supply of purchasing power, and as such are more powerful than the workers who only have modest excess capital. The capitalists invest in order to multiply the original stock of capital by a factor (e.g. interest rate or profit rate). This is the economics part. Looking at it from another perspective, the capitalist is a more fortunate person, as his spending power can be used to smoothen discomfort. The capitalist does not need to work in a factory, where his health is at stake. He does not have to fear diseases, as his money could buy healthcare. From that perspective, one could argue that a capitalist has a better life.

In the paragraph above we established that labourers are worse off due to a lack of excess purchasing power. Furthermore their potential is not sufficient to accumulate a significant pile of capital. Labourers produce output, in environments and using production techniques defined by the capitalists. Capitalists are less bound by others. They do not need to show up at specific times, adapt to their superiors, because they can afford to forego income. That makes their attitude to life a different one.

Capitalists are interested in protecting the value of their capital stock. Therefore, their daily job includes managing the enterprise and relating to other parties involved. You could call this labour I guess.

For a labourer income is largely tied to production. That is why the labourer has limited options. A capitalist’s income is less tied to the production. He depends on the joint effort of his labourers and the way he manages the company. If we put this in formulas, then for the labourer holds that ‘income = production’, and for the capitalists ‘income > production’. There must be one group missing here, namely the group for which holds that ‘income < production’. They are the artists / inventors / scholars / starting entrepreneurs that are investing in a future. They are all potential capitalists, people whose products’ values have not been established yet (and maybe never will).

All the scenarios above included ‘production’. I am sure that ‘you are what you produce’ must be true. It is one of the basic fulfilments in life. Even though in the richer part of the world there are those who have an income, but who do not produce anything. Think about the long term unemployed. Often these group of people are floating on discontent. Their added value to the world has disappeared. They are not making a difference.

I have wondered why those with university degrees have entered work relations as labourers. Now I know that it is a way of living. Being a labourer, capitalist or artist / inventor / entrepreneur reflects a way of living. It is a vision on ‘the meaning of life’ and the willingness to take risks to outperform. It requires a willingness to go deep. To die and get up again. You are what you produce. How you get there helps to define the product.