s are not only different, but are opposed to each other. According to Marx the relationship between the capitalist and the worker is inherently antagonistic. What one gains is lost to the other. Because of this he felt that it was inevitable that the worker would have to rise up against the capitalist.
Let?s take a closer look at the capitalist-worker relationship and how workers wages are determined. The same principles that determine the price of goods also determine the wages. Supply and demand and the competition for labor determine wages by the capitalists. This is what causes the cost of labor to fluctuate and the fluctuations revolve around the cost of producing labor. The costs can be described as the cost of maintaining and training the worker. The easier a worker is to replace or the less training required to educate a worker, the smaller his wage. If there is little or no training necessary, a workers wages will equal the subsistence wage (the minimum amount necessary for a worker to survive). In addition the subsistence wage the capitalist must also consider the cost of replacing worn out workers. The addition of this cost to the subsistence wage is the minimum wage. Although many workers do live and work for a wage below this level, the minimum wage correlates to the wages of the entire working class and this wage is the point about which wages of the workers fluctuates.
Understanding how wages are determined in the capitalist society we can now examine the relationship between labor and capital in more detail. The laborer receives wages in exchange for his labor. The laborer receives this wage which provides him a method of survival in that he can by food, clothes, and shelter. However, the subsistence wage will not provide the worker any means of economic progression. It will not provide him a way of moving up from the lower classes. An example of this would be a factory worker. He works for one day and is paid for his work ten dollars. The factory owner earns twenty dollars for the work put forth by the worker after subtracting the wage that he pays the worker. Therefore, the employer has created for himself twenty dollars by doing nothing more than giving the laborer work. The factory owner can then use the twenty dollars to reinvest in the factory or in another venture, increasing his wealth. The laborer on the other hand, earns his ten dollars a day, which is only sufficient for him to purchase necessities. It is often said that in capitalism it is in the best interest of the worker and the capitalist for the capitalist?s ventures to succeed. This is true in that if the venture does not succeed, the worker nor the capitalist will reap a reward. However, when it does succeed it is the capitalist who has the opportunity to increase his wealth and it is in the capitalist?s best interests that the worker not be given opportunity to earn more than the subsistence wage he is being paid.
The growth of the business under capitalism will logically benefit a select number of capitalists. The few who are fortunate enough to have wealth have the opportunity for their wealth to grow. However the worker is not as fortunate. Marx knew that a growth in profits for a firm did not help the worker as one might suspect. In fact, a growth in profits would imprison the worker. When profits increase, wages might also increase but not at the same proportion to profit. An increase in profits for a firm of 30 percent could translate roughly to an increase in wages of 5 percent. Even though wages rose, they rose proportionately less that profits. Therefore the relative wage has not increased, but in fact it has gotten smaller. As the few capitalists increase their wealth, the gap between the rich and the poor must widen. The size of the working class (Marx refers to them as proletariats) grows in number, but their individual wealth is stagnant. The relationship between the two classes is a control relationship of the capitalist over the worker. This is not a great improvement over the relationship between the feudal lords and th