This covers chapter 8 of Hill & Myatt on Marginal Productivity theory, which says that you get paid what you are worth. That is, all factors receive payment according to their contribution to production. This argument is very wrong for many reasons. These reasons are discussed in the Anti-Textbook, and further explained in the lecture.
Sample Question for Final: A meta-theory is a theory about theories. Meta-theories about justice -- whether laborers and capitalists DESERVE what the earn -- lead to the differences between Marx's labor theory of value, and neo-classical theory of marginal productivity. NOTE, some questions go BEYOND the lecture coverage, and will require you to think for yourself and perhaps do some additional research (especially question 4)
Explain Marx's Labor theory of value, and how it leads to the conclusion that capitalists exploit laborers.
Explain the neoclassical theory of marginal productivity and how it leads to the opposite conclusion.
Provide TWO theoretical defects in the neoclassical theory.
Consider the argument on a META-LEVEL -- how can we argue about whether or not capitalists receive a fair reward for their contribution to the productive process
Divergence between productivity and pay for laborers - Again shows that laborers are not getting their marginal products
CEO Pay Continues to Rise - Empirical Evidence that pay comes from POWER and not from PRODUCTIVITY
AM09: Marginal Productivity - Video Lecture 92 minutes - Textbook theory says that all factors of production get what they deserve, in terms of their contribution to production. Anti-textbook explains why this is wrong.