@glennlab . . . NONSENSE

. . . one common example (of many)

A small business (could be a franchise) owner has :
loan(s) (capital),
manger(s) (multiple shifts),
and a few employees (probably non-union).

EACH is dependent on the others.

@FearlessFly 1. A capitalist does no work, they depend on their money to work for them.

Now go back and look what I wrote, I said it works BEST if they work together, but labor CAN exist without the other two. A small farmer can grow their own produce and sell it themselves as can a carpenter or a plumber, or anyother small business person. You are saying they have to work together, they don't. Just because they do work together, doesn't mean that they have to..

To use your example, a small business has built itself up by the labor of its owner, doesn't need to take out a loan, so has wealth, but not capital. Has not expanded to need shifts, so no managers, and only one employee. That employee generates the wealth. If more are hired, then the owner becomes the manager/worker until such time as the management function becomes his only work, giving you now only labor and management, no capital investment only sweat equity. It is only after the operation becomes large enough to need a cash infusion for expansion that capital comes into play. This is the model for most small businesses.