>Because people start off with nothing essentially.
This is disputed by figures as diverse as Aristotle, Spinoza, Hegel and Rousseau. It is not fact at least as presented here without discussion.
>While exploitation may be real presuming that management and capital contribute nothing is just plain not anchored in reality.
The theory of exploitation in Marx or post-Marx (even without the LTV) does not depend on the assumption that capitalists cannot add value. I'd suggest looking at the work of John Roemer and his work on PECP and CECP.
>It can improve and boost living standards per person without a specialized pyramid scheme of labor.
Was this ever cast in doubt? I'd also caution the application of a historical example to the society of today, since the applicability of the principle has not been proven.
>While raw inputs may come from land processing it is where the bulk of value actually comes from.
This is disputed by figures as diverse as Aristotle, Spinoza, Hegel and Rousseau. It is not fact at least as presented here without discussion.
>While exploitation may be real presuming that management and capital contribute nothing is just plain not anchored in reality.
The theory of exploitation in Marx or post-Marx (even without the LTV) does not depend on the assumption that capitalists cannot add value. I'd suggest looking at the work of John Roemer and his work on PECP and CECP.
>It can improve and boost living standards per person without a specialized pyramid scheme of labor.
Was this ever cast in doubt? I'd also caution the application of a historical example to the society of today, since the applicability of the principle has not been proven.
>While raw inputs may come from land processing it is where the bulk of value actually comes from.
This is textbook Marx.