[tomcam]

Do you consider it exploitation when someone voluntarily takes the $20,000 job? Is it exploitation when the person who risked the money to start the business loses it all and goes bankrupt?

How is providing the two jobs not contributing to the economy?

How do you clear $60,000 on widgets? What about the costs of supplies, insurance, compliance to government regulations, city/state/county/federal taxes, import duties,R&D, documentation, advertising, and so on?

[beaconstudios]

Exploitation isn't when somebody is forced to do something, it's when one person profits off the work of another. So in my example, the job is exploitative, yes. Having a business fail is not exploitation.

I didn't make an argument about whether it was contributing to the economy or not, but that doesn't matter - slavery contributed to the economy too, but it's also morally wrong.

It's a stripped down hypothetical on purpose, to get to the heart of the question. Non-labour material concerns are left as an exercise for the reader.

[erik_seaberg]

I am borrowing the shareholders’ big investment to amplify the value of my own work. I’m not taking any risk and I’m not paying them, instead they are paying me more than I could earn without them.

> one person profits off the work of another

Trade needs to benefit both parties.

[tomcam]

> Exploitation isn't when somebody is forced to do something, it's when one person profits off the work of another.

We live in different world. Thank you for your response.

[beaconstudios]

If by that you mean we have different understandings of the word "exploitation" then sure thing. But my definition is the dictionary one:

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/exploita...

> the act of using someone unfairly for your own advantage

But we probably just disagree on the meaning of "unfairly" within that definition.