Marx and Lenin thought property was the key. My studies have convinced me that the key is income.

Differences in income generate differences in wealth (assets: property). It is in the distribution of pecuniary remuneration that exploitation exists.

In terms of justice (a concept both Marx and Lenin dismissed as having any meaning in this world), how people get their money is what matters, not how much they have. It is possible to generate a huge income without exploiting other people, such as an author or performer: people choose to purchase their output or not. Exploitation is self-interested people arbitrarily determining what the distribution of remuneration within a business (i.e., a for-profit cooperative concern) will be.

If ending exploitation is the most important thing, then why not accept that Marx and Lenin--both of whom lived and died before the Great Depression-- were wrong about how to eliminate it? Why not advocate for this new approach to ending exploitation?

As a first step, ending unemployment and poverty via a democratically distributed income, at no cost to the employers and without redistributing anything--and even ending taxes and public debt--gives the exploiters nowhere to go politically. Once a democratically distributed income were established, to take the next step to end exploitation would be as politically irrefutable.