The workers could work on their own were it not for the fact that capitalists withhold from them the equipment and resources to do so.
Pardon? I don't recall any regulations or restrictions on buying industrial machinery, or raw materials, or any of the required equipment to do exactly the same thing he's doing for the employer on his own. Or are you suggesting that the employer make him a gift of the factory?
No, it isn't. It's packaged, assembled into a group with other like widgets and then packaged, or compiled into a full device by adding other doodads and whatsits and widgets, and then packaged. It's changed in a myriad of ways, and each of those processes he had to either do himself, buy the machinery to do, or hire someone else to do. There is considerable further processing to be done after the initial production. Don't forget other costs, such as overhead on the factory itself, maintenance on the machines, marketing expenses, etc.
See my response to TheKid.
Really? Expending resources (saved work from before) isn't the same as expending effort directly? Money is representative of value, regardless of how you define "value".
I think, perhaps, you ascribe too much power to the average Capitalist. The only people who have enough influence in a field to blacklist someone are the "captains of industry", the Bill Gates and Steve Jobs, as it were. Nobody is going to care if you quit say, Trend Micro because they weren't paying you enough, Especially when you offer your talents to their competitor. Additionally, let me remind you that there are always those who do not listen to the "power elite", those willing to bypass Bill Gates saying not to hire him, if his skills are good enough.
Employers never ask for references from potential hires?
Of course they do. But a smart job-seeker uses people he
didn't piss off as his references. As I said, there are always people who don't care what your prior employers say, they want your skills.
Not so. In the free market, there are options for every level of compensation. If his skills are not sufficient to warrant a higher rate of pay, then he is free to seek employment using a different set of skills, or apply those same skills on his own, fashioning widgets from his own raw materials, packaging and marketing them himself, and if his widgets are of a competitive quality with those of the company he left, he can charge a comparable price, gaining the profit for himself.
What if capitalists control all the resources?
Good! Then they will allocate them to the best uses, as those are the most profitable. You seem to be forgetting that a "Capitalist" isn't some big fat dude in an office, lighting his cigars with $100 bills. The worker who owns nothing more than his clothes and car is still a capitalist. He still seeks to offer his services at the best rate, and will seek that whenever possible.
Of Course, if he starts selling too many widgets, he may find that he can't keep up with production and have to hire an employee...
Or, he could do the right thing and recruit someone as a partner.
That's an option... If he could find someone who contributes equally. If the new hire is just running the drill press, there's no reason from him to profit from the marketing, and packaging, and, and, and, etc.
tl;dr: Welcome to the 21st Century. It's not 1840 anymore.