The big question: Why did Europe not suffer a wave of worker's

>>533970
Historian Robert Paxton observes that on the European continent the provisions of the welfare state were originally enacted by conservatives in the late nineteenth century and by fascists in the twentieth in order to distract workers from unions and socialism, and were opposed by leftists and radicals. He recalls that the German welfare state was set up in the 1880s by Chancellor Bismarck, who had just closed 45 newspapers and passed laws banning the German Socialist Party and other meetings by trade unionists and socialists.[17] A similar version was set up by Count Eduard von Taaffe in the Austro-Hungarian Empire a few years later. "All the modern twentieth-century European dictatorships of the right, both fascist and authoritarian, were welfare states", he writes. "They all provided medical care, pensions, affordable housing, and mass transport as a matter of course, in order to maintain productivity, national unity, and social peace."

"Continental European Marxists opposed piecemeal welfare measures as likely to dilute worker militancy without changing anything fundamental about the distribution of wealth and power. It was only after World War II, when they abandoned Marxism (in 1959 in West Germany, for example), that continental European socialist parties and unions fully accepted the welfare state as their ultimate goal."[19]

Successful implementation of Social Democracy in European countries.

File: gramsci.gif (34KB, 214x235px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 214x235px

Christianity and traditional values. That's why Cultural Marxism was invented to get rid of it.

Because Marx had low IQ and wasn't good with predicting shit.

>>533992
>in order to distract workers from unions and socialism

Why is the narrative always framed as the employers "tricking" the workers with welfare in order to stave off revolution?

I think it is more likely that employers became more socially conscious when they realized that happier, healthier workers are more productive and provide a wider consumer base.

>>533970

Basically, workers succeeded in getting enough basic reforms in place that they were no longer particularly inclined to revolt.

>>533998
Pretty sure that's what capitalism wants to get rid of.

>>533998
This.

>>534016
>I think it is more likely
That's a nice thought, but that's absolutely not what the evidence and records suggest.

>>534032
No, capitalism doesn't give a fuck. It only cares about profit.

>>534032
Capitalism doesn't exist. It's a word invented by communists to serve as a focus of revolutionary antagonism.

>>533996
>Successful implementation of Social Democracy in European countries.
This. But more than that, just the expanding wealth and the expansion of capitalism to the lower classes.

I mean, the whole basis of Marx's theorems was the assumption that the capitalists would never make concessions to the proletariat, and that there would always be a small capital-owning class and a large labouring class underneath them. In the 19th century workers owned virtually nothing - everything beyond immediate personal possessions was rented - and had almost no access to capital. Marxism become redundant the moment a worker first took out a loan from a bank and bought his house, because according to Marx that was never going to happen.

>>534016

>Why is the narrative always framed as the employers "tricking" the workers with welfare in order to stave off revolution?

Because people who are sympathetic to Marxism are butt-hurt that they didn't get their revolution.

>>534042
By all means, present us with this evidence and record of yours.

>>534060
More that that, employers being nice to workers isn't supposed to happen according to Marx. Every time an employer uses some of his profits to make conditions for workers better, Marxists have to put that much more effort into their mental gymnastics.

>>533970
Marx vastly underestimated the versatility and robustness of the capitalist system.

The workers themselves became the consumers and the classes began to overlap. As wages rose due to competitive factors and unions a middle class emerged that began demanding more and more diversified goods driving the market even further and raising wages even more.

Ironically, in feeding sub-cultures with luxury goods capitalism has done more to erode the traditional economic classed than socialism ever would or could.

>>534060
Moreover, notice that the most conservative, pro-capitalist people are always the workers while the ones sympathetic to marxism are always middle class cafeteria dwellers and sheltered retards at universities.

The proles don't want to be "equal", they want to be rich.

It's almost like a delusional jewish NEET predicted it

>>534088
>The proles don't want to be "equal", they want to be rich.
this is the entire scam.
no prole will ever be rich.

>>534104
Most millionaires today are self-made. Individual wealth is a much more attainable and realistic goal than global equality.

>>534104
If only the working class shared the lefts insight into what's best for them, theyd be much better off

>>534104
Plenty of proles become rich every day, but not a single society ever reached equality.

>>534115
a millionaire is not wealthy is our society.
millionaires are the new petite bourgeoisie

File: image.jpg (74KB, 480x345px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 480x345px

>>533970
1) Marx wasn't a very good prophet. Or economist.
2) mass graves all over leftist nations turned out to be unappealing.

>>534134
>a millionaire is not wealthy
Wew lad.

>>534121
The working class are kept permanently exhausted and stupefied so they will never come to realize how fucked they truly are.

File: original.jpg (31KB, 500x374px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 500x374px

>>534134
>a millionaire is not wealthy is our society.

File: 1450907661018.jpg (669KB, 1080x1920px) Image search: [Google]

669KB, 1080x1920px

>>534134

>a millionaire is not wealthy is our society.

Where do you live bro?

File: 1450643046668.jpg (88KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 800x600px

>>534149
Time spent working for $$$ earned has dropped significantly in the last century. And due to global capitalist markets $$$ earned translates into greater goods, services and essentials than ever before.

People in the capitalist west have more spare time than ever before. We have more leisure time to do things like learn, entertain ourselves and shitpost Marxist rhetoric on 4chan than at any other time in human history.

Have you literally only ever read Marxist books? Have you completely ignored the last century of history? Or are you just completely retarded?

Marx (and communism) was idealistic rather than realistic.

>>534134
Do you live in Beverly Hills or something if a millionaire isn't wealthy to you?

>>534180
Ironically Marx claimed that his shit is scientific and called Christianity a stupid pipe dream fooling the masses. Communism is as much of an utopia s kingdom of heaven is.

>>534147
>>534162
>>534171
>>534182
Listen to Mr. Trump's speech about his tiny "million dollar loan" he got from his pop as a lad. That is what the truly wealthy think of your paltry dreams.

>>534192
>you aren't wealthy if you aren't John D. Rockefeller wealthy

>>534192
Who gives a shit? 20$ is bullshit to you but a windfall the crack addict on the street. Should he be given your 20$ because you wouldn't appreciate as much as him? Should he not aspire to earn his own 20$ because you made 200$? There will always be someone who is wealthier than you.

Why do Marxists point at a rich man's bank account as if that's a valid argument in any context? Is your entire ideology based on jealousy?

File: 1435358214498.jpg (44KB, 282x341px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 282x341px

>>534192
>You gotta be a multi milliard dollar tycoon to be classed as rich

>>534192
>You're not strong unless you're a champion powerlifter
>You're not fast unless you're Usain Bolt
>You're not tall unless you're Andre the Giant

File: Doubt.png (85KB, 492x280px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 492x280px

>>534192

>You're not wealthy unless you make as much money as Donald Trump.

Whether a millionaire is wealthy or not really depends on what you mean by wealthy. For example, 3-10% of the adults in Western countries are worth more than 1 million USD, there are more than 13 million millionaires in the US (and even more if you consider households rather than individual adults.)

>>534016
>I think it is more likely that employers became more socially conscious when they realized that happier, healthier workers are more productive and provide a wider consumer base.
When did they forget these lessons then? Because in the last at least 30 years they've been working in the opposite direction, outsourcing, stagnating wages and purchasing power, tax evasion.

>>534208
>>534220
>>534222
My argument is that no prole can make it into the upper class. That was closed off decades ago.

You might get to be moderately wealthy, but you'll never be part of the decision making class.

You can get rich, but you'll ALWAYS be a mere worker

>>534192
By this same logic you aren't really poor unless you're literally homeless and dying of hunger.

>>534240
I guess all the tech giants who popped up in the last 30~ years or so are mere figments of my imagination then.

>>534238
They didn't forget them, they realized Chinese sweatshop workers will kiss their feet if they just allow them a 15 minute break to give birth.

File: 1438188052360.png (182KB, 442x341px) Image search: [Google]

182KB, 442x341px

>>534240
>You might get to be moderately wealthy, but you'll never be part of the decision making class.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stefan_L%C3%B6fven
Swedens most powerful mans adoptive father was a lumberjack

>>534247
>Bill Gates was a prole

>>534251
Maybe not Gates, but Jobs was. His father was an immigrant from Syria.

>>534248
So they don't care about the health, happiness and purchasing power of their workers? Which is it then?

>>534238
The third world has developed enough infrastructure that all but the most white collar jobs can be done for a pittance by Chinese and Indians.

The removal of trade barriers caused the decline you talk about. Globalization was the biggest hoodwink of all time.

>>534251

Based on the definition that you keep giving us which classes everybody who isn't a multi-billionaire as a lowly worker, yes.

>>534240
Sheldon Adelson is LITERALLY part of America's 'decision-making' class
dude's parents were some poor fuck ukranian immigrants

>>534249
>his biography
Holy shit, Sweden never stops baffling me. Next time they'll elect a Somali refugee fresh off the boat or something.

Either way, I think we can agree that A) Sweden is a special case B) this dude is not even wealthy

File: from-poor-to-rich-billionare-infographic.jpg (611KB, 900x2811px) Image search: [Google]

611KB, 900x2811px

>>534240

>>534261
He made his fortune like 50 years ago. You couldn't do that anymore, all those low hanging fruits have been picked already.

File: 1451454681417.png (11KB, 470x454px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 470x454px

>>534240
Yes but your mistake is in assuming the decision making class is divided from the rest of us down economic lines instead of socio-historical ones. There are plenty of multi-millionaires and billionaires who make more money than Queen Elizabeth or Barack Obama but they don't sit in on Bilderberg meetings for virtue of their deep pockets.

It's ironic you brought up Trump who despite being a billionaire is a verified political outsider currently getting blasted by every media outlet out there. (Also, I'm fairly certain there have been plenty of Presidents and Prime Ministers who were brought out up in poverty but I decided to avoid that subject so I could tackle the core of your flawed argument.)

>>534267
Bullshit.

Prove it.

>>534266
>you can go from poor to wealthy if you sweat enough
That's such a disgusting lie, I'm actually mad IRL.

>>534253
Jobs was an American middle class kids who went to university

That immediately puts him in the top 1% of humanity

Same goes for Zuckerberg

>His father was an immigrant from Syria.
He was adopted and raised by a white American couple

>>534263
He -is- wealthy, he makes 425~ dollars a day, which is a lot in Sweden at least. And Sweden is still capitalist, don't shift the goal posts my man.

>>534273
A minute ago you were claiming that millionaires weren't rich. Now you're saying that middle class Americans are the top 1%.
Which is it? Do you have to be a street shitting Indian to be considered poor?

>>534271
I'm poor, you're poor, therefore I'm right.

>>534254
Globalization means they don't have to. They can simply keep moving their production facilities to cheaper and cheaper locations. When you sell to the whole world, it's irrelevant whether your slave-tier Bangladeshi workers can afford the products they make for you.

>>534283
We'll see how the endless recession and dropping income their behavior causes across all their markets will affect sales.

>>534267
>it's 1890
>what do you mean you can go from zero to hero? all the low hanging fruit is already picked, you will NEVER be as rich as the Anglo robber baron elite

I love this meme. 50 years ago there was no IT market, now there is and it makes random college kids multi millionaires almost overnight.

Also stop moving the goalposts, retard.

>>534291
>random college kids
If you consider a hand full one in a million geniuses "random college kids"...

>>534266
As this graph implicitly admits, only 18% of billionaires are not either direct heirs to their wealth or grew up in families wealthy enough to send their kids to college.

That's not looking too hot for your "self-made man" narrative.

File: reason-holocaust-denial-pullquote-martin.png (478KB, 790x661px) Image search: [Google]

478KB, 790x661px

>>534146
>mass graves all over leftist nations turned out to be unappealing.

Go back to bed, Rummel.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bergen-Belsen_concentration_camp

>>534293
So the thing that made them rich was being smart, rather than their original economic background, thanks for admitting that.

File: Hawaii.jpg (88KB, 590x721px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 590x721px

Hi friends

Everyone tried evolution over revolution, which fell to bits towards the 20th century.

>>534253
"Refugees" from Syria or Lebanon tend to be high class historically (The Lebanese in particular are part of the capitalists in much of Africa and Latin America)
As for Job's father:

"Steve Jobs's biological father, Abdulfattah "John" Jandali (b. 1931), was born into a Muslim household and grew up in Homs, Syria.[9] Jandali is the son of a self-made millionaire [!!!] who did not go to college and a mother who was a traditional housewife.[9] While an undergraduate at the American University of Beirut, he was a student activist and spent time in jail for his political activities.[9] Although Jandali initially wanted to study law, he eventually decided to study economics and political science.[9]"

That doesn't matter though, because Steve Jobs was not a prole anyway. He was basically a hippie in his youth and a yuppie by the time he became rich.

>>534287
Recessions only make for cheaper, more desperate labor

>>534304
They also make for smaller markets and tighter budgets.

>>534296
>wealthy enough to send their kids to college

The rest of the world isn't like America where you have to mortgage your family farm to be able to afford college, though.

>mfw the only criticism of Capitalism is that farmers from Ethiopia aren't able to become multi-billionaire oil tycoons

File: 0121 - X0hvVVp.jpg (58KB, 636x781px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 636x781px

>>534309
England is

>>534291
50 years ago kids didn't emerge into adulthood with $100k+ in debt, thereby rendered completely incapable of entrepreneurial activity.

Crippling lifelong debt combined with no social safety net means that if you slip up even once, you fall right into the poorhouse.

File: 1451532756092.png (40KB, 825x635px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 825x635px

>>534303
Holy shit dude, how many times do you plan on shifting the goalpost?

By the end of this thread 'prole' will be defined as homeless, crack addicted black transsexuals and everyone else is part of a privileged 1%

File: killurself.jpg (19KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 300x300px

>>534315

>everyone goes to college and becomes wealthy
>you have to go to college in order to make money

stop.

>>534315
>>534322
I'd say the systematic high levels of debt both on a national and personal level is perhaps the biggest failure of neoliberalism.

I've recently become a house broken working man and I honestly say I'd rather pay out my ass for taxes than put up with this shit. Most of my friends can't even afford to move out.

>>534329
>unironically using the word neoliberalism

>>>/lit/

>>534331
what else am I supposed to call it?

>>534315
Pretty sure universities and colleges are government supported monopolies that are not subjected to free market competition.

Ballooning student debt is largely the fault of government interference. But by all means, continue to blame that dang 1%

>>534334
Something that's not a lefty buzzword.

>>534309
>The rest of the world isn't like America where you have to mortgage your family farm to be able to afford college, though.
Yes. and the reason you get to go to college and make something of yourself instead of being a farm laborer knee deep in shit is because Marxists spent a century fighting and dying so that your family could have that kind of social mobility, you ungrateful faggot.

>>534341
Like what? I try to be objective about these things. Its not the worst system ever implemented, its got a certain level of comfort to it.

I'm referring to post Thatcher/Reagan capitalism here.

File: thoughts.png (16KB, 241x200px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 241x200px

>>534337
>Ballooning student debt is largely the fault of government interference.
Please elaborate

File: 1431536318643.jpg (47KB, 330x319px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 330x319px

>>534346
>cheap schools are the result of marxism

Jesus Christ you're worse than feminists ... in fact I wouldn't be surprised if you're the same people

>>534355
Historically speaking he's not entirely wrong. The people that secured the basic workers liberties that us in the west have tended to be of a Marxist bent.

You might not like said liberties, but it doesn't make them not exist and it doesn't make the history behind them suddenly irrelevant.

>>533970
Because of WWI.

A huge portion of the impoverished 18 to 25 year old male demographic (that tends to be the main participant in revolutions) was wiped out right at the point in time when communist uprisings were starting to happen. Additionally, the economic demands of the war helped push income taxes into effect on the wealthy, diminishing the sense of injustice and class anger.

Combined with the upsurge in patriotic sentiments and national security policies that comes with any war, this effectively suppressed communism.

>>534351
How is a poor student able to get a $100,000 loan to study Indian Feminist Literature or something like that?
How is the university able to get away with asking $100,000 for a bullshit degree?

If you can answer that you understand the problem.

>>533970
Because whenever the conditions of workers got below ideal, the capitalists consented.

>>534360
>he
You mean you. Stop samefagging, marxkid.

File: figure-cmd-1.gif (13KB, 685x349px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 685x349px

>>534337
>Ballooning student debt is largely the fault of government interference

Since the government has so much control over their universities, how about they institute a price cap on tuition fees?

Consider this: America has one of the highest public education expenditures per capita, and yet has probably the most 'free market' college system in the world. If the Netherlands, Sweden, Austria and Ireland can all have free higher education while spending LESS on each student than we do, then our system is obviously deeply flawed.

Ask yourself in who's interest it is to keep the average Americans uneducated and docile?

But go ahead, blame the whole problem on niggers sucking up all of your resources, as you have been trained to believe.

>>534374
Thanks for the reply friend, but I'm in this thread at a rather politically confusing stage of my life and your whinging is making me support the leftists here.

>>534069
Not him, but look at history.

Socialist parties and Trade Unions just kept on gaining more and more power, there were socialist rallies in the US alone that had hundreds of thousands of people attending and the rulling class were not getting better, they were getting worse, more abusive and more reactionary, in the US alone, fascist company paramilitaries were formed who murdered and lynched Union members possibly by the thousands.

Politicians saw this, saw the unrest spreading and basically blackmailed the Capitalist class to build the welfare state.

>>534351
Subsidies destroy competition because 18 year olds are usually too stupid to consider cost/benefit analysis if there's not an immediate cost.

>>534384
Nobody cares about your mental struggles, retard.

>>534115
>millionaires today are self-made.
t. friedman

>>534393
Everything you've said so far has seemed like a failure of consumer capitalism to me.

>when given a choice, these people make the wrong one
>the government allow them to make said choice
>fucking government
ancaps are whack

>>534351
Prices rise as a consequence of monopoly. Universities have no market competition as governments give the money to students in trust for only a handful of pre-chosen establishments. There is no space in this equation for an up-and-coming competitor, not for higher learning anyway. Few can pay their costs outright so universities exist as a symbiotic organism with government.

Universities get to slowly raise rates over time and the government gets to keep large portions of it's populace indebted to it.

>>534383
The US govt. would not be able to afford to offer free post-secondary to its citizens at this juncture. Niggers sucking up welfare that does nothing to improve their lives is one reason why the US debt is so high. Another reason is the military and there are a handful of others. (you did create a false equivalency between American and European economies)

As well, the college system as a consequence of what I just explained is demanding absurd amounts of money for utterly useless degrees. If at this juncture say... Sanders got elected then the US would spend literally billions so limp wristed millenials could get degrees in medieval transexual art and a host of other trivialities. Meanwhile you're forced to import more foreign engineers.

>>534400
you seem like a nice person to be friends with

File: world-rate-of-profit.png (624KB, 6107x3987px) Image search: [Google]

624KB, 6107x3987px

>>533970

Do people here actually read Marx? Why hasn't it happened? Because the technological level of development, RoP and OCC that will cause capitalism to finally implode on itself hasn't happened yet and was delayed by the huge destruction of wealth after WW2.

Marx wasn't predicting the next 50 years, he was predicting a phase Capitalism would have to eventually reach after maybe 100, 200 etc years.

That's like saying "Why hasn't the sun exploded yet?, science disproven"

>>534393
It's not even that. It's like the housing scheme that gave, say, $30,000 to help everyone purchase their first house.
The result? House prices instantly shot up by about $30,000.
It's the same problem with students loans except students actually have to pay that money back to the state eventually.

>>534406
You should re-evaluate your life if you're trying to find friends on 4chan.

>>534412
sickest of burns brah

>>534393
>Prices rise as a consequence of monopoly
Is there only one university in the whole of the USA? Can't unis compete with each other, even with those few pre-chosen estabilishments?
I also doubt the goverment want people in debt, they want their people educated.

>>534405
>Niggers sucking up welfare that does nothing to improve their lives is one reason why the US debt is so high
Literally the narrative in action.

Anyway, all it would take is a small number of target laws to pop this education balloon that's been allowed to inflate for decades unchecked.

>>534416
>I also doubt the goverment want people in debt, they want their people educated.
kek

>>534420
Why would a goverment want their people with their income compromised? Human capital isn't a new concept either

>>534416
>I also doubt the goverment want people in debt, they want their people educated.
I never fail to be amused by people who (rightfully) consider corporations greedy but at the same time think the government has only the best intentions.

Also I think he should've used the word cartel rather than monopoly, it's pretty blatant with the case of AMA accreditation for med schools for example.

>>534407
Kapital was published 149 years ago

>>534423
Quite simply, an uneducated underclass is profitable as fuck. The debt problem isn't the state's problem so why should they give a fuck? It just pulls more power away from the people.

>>534407
>i-its coming i swear
>if y-you'd actually read the book you'd believe me

This literally is a religion for you people, isn't it?

>>534432
It literally is.

>Jesus promised kingdom of heaven will come in his lifetime
>it didn't
>j-just keep believing we're living in the end times I swear

File: 1427519878341.png (3KB, 380x305px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 380x305px

>>534431
>the government wants people stupid and controlled
>give all your power and economic agency to the government

>>534423
>Why would a goverment want their people with their income compromised?

People who have a lot of debt inherently don't want to rock the boat.

Since any disturbance of the boat could land them in the shit, an indebted person will be more politically conservative and favor the status quo.

Having each generation of young adults shackled with unplayable debt is basically a mechanism to prevent something like the 60s counterculture from occurring ever again.

>>534437
not everyone anti capitalist is a bolshevik, my friend

>>534432
>>534435
I havn't read Marx like anon, but I was under the impression that Marx made specific quantitative predictions; such as when the level of income inequality reaches such and such, or when the rate of economic development slows down so much.

The conditions that he predicts will trigger his revolution have not actually occurred yet, although they were certainly on course to during Marx's lifetime.

>>534438
You're talking like the US was some unstable shithole, it isn't. Having people in debt means they're also less inclined to buy shit, lowering VAT revenue, and wanting a dumber population also means you want a less productive society, thus lowering the governement income tax revenue

>>533998
This is a really vulgar reading of Gramsci.

File: 1431973726991.jpg (63KB, 300x320px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 300x320px

>>534445
Oh boy. We've reached the time in the thread for the No-True-Scotsman.

Please tell us which specific, special snowflake brand of socialist you are and why it and it alone can resolves capitalism's faults without falling into communism's pitfalls.

>>534249
He's a labour union leader. Working class creme, just like army men.

>>534463
He has a point. Someone with anarchist leanings will have an entirely different spectrum of beliefs than a Marxist-Leninist-Whatever.

It would be like treating a right-libertarian as a national socialist because they are on the same side of some arbitrary scale

>>534463
quite simply I don't know, the world is a far too complex place for that

I like a lot of things about capitalism and a lot of things about socialism, but I really dislike the shit at the extremes and in the middle

do you know what all the answers are? why haven't you been made emperor of the world yet?

>>533970
1916-1923:
France
Italy
Germany
Hungary
Russia
Finland
Ireland

>>534452
His chief predictions are to do with the OCC (the level of mechanisation versus human labour in value terms) and rate of profit.

These are the "general tendencies" or the "laws of motion" of capitalism that are contradictions.

These conditions have triggered in the past but capitalism has expanded by introducing new commodities (fabric, steel, chemicals, consumer goods, information) or expanding geographically (France, Germany, The United States, Europe and Americas, Everywhere).

The limits on the second are pretty obvious.

>>534457
That's just Gramsciposter. He's a troll that spams Gramsci pics in /his/

>>534484
it's going to be interesting to see what happens in 50 years or so when globalism finally locks the entire world into a single common labor market and there's no more cheap labor to flee to anymore because you cant outsource off the globe

>>534341
Neoliberalism is a legitimate term

>There's nothing wrong with capitalism, I swear!
http://i2.wp.com/money.visualcapitalist.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/all-the-worlds-money-and-markets-dv.png

its because marx sucks

>>534518
You're not allowed to use the word neoliberal to mean what it actually means on 4chan. This is 4chan, so when someone says neoliberal, it's supposed to be a /pol/ thinking he's talking about the opposite of what it means.

>>534238
yes and that's why Bernie sanders managed to get so much steam in the election despite him being a socialist

File: 227796-red_faction_front_geileresel.jpg (48KB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 640x640px

>>534514
We'll have mars colonies by then

File: benschmidt.org_Degrees.png (182KB, 1904x742px) Image search: [Google]

182KB, 1904x742px

>>534405
>There is no space in this equation for an up-and-coming competitor, not for higher learning anyway.

The value of a university degree is based on the prestige of the university that granted it, so unless your new university has a teaching staff made out of Nobel prize winners, it's really tough to even start.

>Niggers sucking up welfare that does nothing to improve their lives is one reason why the US debt is so high.

Not even close.

http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/year_spending_2016USbn_17bs2n_2024#usgs302

>If at this juncture say... Sanders got elected then the US would spend literally billions so limp wristed millenials could get degrees in medieval transexual art and a host of other trivialities.

All of the degree bloat is caused by people taking business degrees. The humanities have shrunk as both a percentage and absolute number of total degrees.

>Meanwhile you're forced to import more foreign engineers.

We already graduate more engineering and science students that we possibly have a use for. The only engineer shortage corporations are worried about are the engineers that work for $20 an hour.

http://spectrum.ieee.org/at-work/education/the-stem-crisis-is-a-myth

>>534526
Shhhh.., don't tell /pol/ that. It's way funnier.

>>534518
It isn't. It's a marxist term describing anything that is vaguely pro-market, from Thatcher through monetarists to fucking Austrian school.

Jews

>>534537
>muh /pol/ boogeyman

So let's see:

Capitalism is /pol/
Fascism is /pol/
Nazism is /pol/
Nationalism is /pol/
Religion is /pol/
Reactionaries are /pol/
Monarchists are /pol/

Basically, everything that isn't outright marxist, is /pol/.

>>534555

Monarchism isn't /pol/

>>534545
Oh just like liberalism is used on here as a catch-all to anything that is vaguely left-leaning?

>>534457
Sorry, I know it was Lukács who said that explicitly, but I don't have an evil-looking picture of him.

>>534545
>It isn't. It's a marxist term describing anything that is vaguely pro-market, from Thatcher through monetarists to fucking Austrian school.

But that's exactly what it is though.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoliberalism

>>534514
To 1990, capital had no interest in a common labour market. In fact as the so-called "neoliberal" policies were implemented dismantling worker's rights in Fordism, lawful migration was halted.

Capital seems to desire a united capital market and a disunited labour market. Something about workers of the world unite probably.

>>534514
Also, to be less specious, in the 1870-1910 period workers formed effective transnational alliances through transnational labour markets. Look at the circulation of struggle through the docks, or seamen, or UK-US-Au-NZ.

Transnational labour was capable of forming transnational resistance to capital.

>>534592
Never mind that your readings of Gramsci are fallacious eisegesis.

>>534561
hello /pol/

>>534134

Yes, but a millionaire is able to live extremely comfortably, provide for himself, and even live a life of pure leisure if they're willing to downgrade their lifestyle somewhat.

If this is an attainable goal for most people, can we really say that most people are being oppressed?

>>533970
Labor Unions and Social Democracy defused the powder keg that Marx thought would inevitably explode.

>>534514
Then we finally will be forced to go to space

>>534484
>SPACE

>>533970
Europe (Russia, Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia...) did "suffer" worker's revolutions, but too early in the development of human history so they failed.
Nowadays class awareness doesn't exist because class struggle moved from bourgeoisie vs proletariat to proletariat vs proletariat.

>>533996
You call this successful?
Brain-washed idiot

>>533970

>Why did Europe not suffer a wave of worker's revolutions, as Marx predicted?

but they did. the year the Manifesto came out there was a continental-wide wave of revolutions that were mostly defeated

>>533970

this >>533992 , in combination with loads and loads of systematic state violence

consider that russia would probably not become communist without the WW1 catastrophy fucking up a allready fucked up empire, china became communist in the aftermath of some decades of war etc...

it takes a lot to destabilise and tear down the political and economic system enough for the working population to manage owerthroving it, othervise they just get killed if they fight and revarded if they submit and cooperate, and thats pretty much how social order works

>>534424
The democratic government (the people in charge at a given moment anyway) needs a degree of popular support to stay in power.

Of course, they also need a degree of corporate sponsorship.

Corporations just need to be profitable and not be caught doing any obvious crimes and even then...

The democratic government has different stakes is all.

>>534002
>Because Marx had low IQ and wasn't good with predicting shit.
>implying IQ predicts intelligence
the irony rofl

>>534555
Genuine religion was /lit/, now /his/. Writing "deus vult" in all caps is /pol/.

>>536683
>I don't know what the word "and" means

>>534162
>>534147
>>534171
A million dollars is still a lot but it is definitely not as much as it used to be. Even when I was a kid in the 90s everyone referred to millionaires and a million dollars to me seemed like an exorbitant amount, until I learned about billionaires... It's the billionaires that can truly throw their weight around on a national or international scale.

>>534360
>The people that secured the basic workers liberties that us in the west have tended to be of a Marxist bent.
The European postwar welfare state was instituted, or at least significantly expanded, under center-right and center-left governments for the most part.

>>534281
Not him, but a figure from 2001 (so take it with a grain of salt considering China's progress on poverty), is that almost half the world's population lived on less the $2 a day. So, in fact, a majority of the world's population lives in extreme poverty. What that guy is saying is that Jobs was not even poor my American standards, and going to university several decades ago, when such an education was not common for most Americans, would have given him a leg up into the upper middle class. However, I disagree that this automatically made him a 1%er, thats a retarded statement on that guy's part.

>>534298
he's saying that being smart is a requirement, but not a guarantee, for becoming rich in the tech boom (having a clever idea also helps for anyone regardless of their intelligence). The corollary is that there are thousands upon thousands of "smart people" who will also try to make it big and will fail miserably.

>>533970
there were plenty proletarian revolutions but most didn't succeed

>>534438
permanent educated underclass. its like a neo-corporate feudalism rofl. soon we'll be having laws where corporations set up their own judicial courts to punish their workers

>>536925

Thats called human resources, and its more like a Soviet commisar from WW2

>>534787
brb writing marxist space opera (socialist realism sci-fi)

>>534514
this has been on my mind too.
>>534653
though "by the nature of capitalism," I figure that competition will eventually lead to deregulation of world labor market.

>>536728
>I don't know what the word "and" means
Your statement reads "marx had a low IQ, therefore he wasn't good at predicting shit." Otherwise grouping to random observations in a sentence offers no insight and makes you look like even more of an idiot.

>>536681
>government needs popular support

So does Coca Cola and Justin Bieber and people willingly give it to them. People are retards and democracy is a sham.

>>536996
Just shut up already you dumbass. I don't even know why human rights extend to marxists when you're clearly subhumans.

>>537019
I'm not a marxist. Now your getting mad that you've been exposed for a dumb observation.

>>533970
Because Marx was wrong. The only people who follow and enact Marx's ideas are edgy losers like Stalin and the edgy losers always fuck it up since they literally just say fuck you to everything in society.

>>534425
And? Feudalism lasted 1500 years.

Marx's predictions are based on intrinsic trends in capitalism that are at the core of the system. These processes are still occurring today and are measurable.

Marx himself said never underestimate Capitalists way to get themselves out of a crisis, but the new bandaid they come up with will cause its own contradictions.

Capitalism has a major crisis every 30 years or so it seems, Capitalism could have easily collapsed in the 70s if the credit card solution wasn't made, now the issue today is insane levels of private debt while profitability continues to fall and wages are stagnant. What is the solution to the next major crisis?

Also level of technology simply hasn't gotten to the levels Marx was talking about, he was talking about an era of mass unemployment due to automation, which is actually expected to come sometime this century.

Because something didn't happen in 19th or early 20th century, doesn't disprove Marx at all, because he didn't even think it would happen in the 19th or 20th century.

>>534299

u dopey cunt

>>536996
'And' doesn't mean 'thus' you fucking retard. Thus would imply that it's a cause and effect statement. Go back to English 101, Marxist scum.

>>537019
>Hasn't read capital
Why do we allow these people to converse in matters of economy and politics? Whether they're leftists or rightists it's just deliberate ignorance.

because thank fuck the plague that is leftism failed

>>536491

Social democracy did fine until liberal right wing became the ideology running the show.

>>539722
>did fine

no

>>539708
literally

>>536933
Do you know some ?

>>534680
How is this an attainable goal for most people. Trying to become a millionaire takes risks.

>>539683
one of the entries for "and" in the dictionary:

>used to connect to clauses, the second of which results from the first.

also, I'm not a marxist

>>539766
We- Yevgeny Zamyatin
:^)

>>539840
It's not in space, anon, and it's not socialist realism neither.

>>533992
The free market will take care of these things as long as there is a well running economy.

As long as there is competition for labor, employers have to treat workers well enough or they will go work someplace else.

Workers who either have things well enough, or have the choice to walk across the street don't need to revolt.

>>539885
>or have the choice to walk across the street

A free market runs unemployment and underemployment between 15 and 60% because of the oligopsony powers of the employers.

Fuck off.

It's funny how there are isolated marxists on the internet who still adhere to Marx's original word even though it's widely accepted in marxist circles that Marx's theories have failed.

>>539856
I know, but they are building a spaceship to spread the revolution to other planets.

>>539909
There are marxist political parties in real life, too.

>>539918
Do you think Zamyatin was favorable to the revolution ?

>>539922
Only in a small way, but the whole space project was a satire of the soviet ideology of the time; that the revolution needed to be spread abroad by force. It's exactly what Lenin tried to do by invading Poland. It was also an an allusion to the pulpy but very influential novel "what is to be done" by nikolai chernyshevsky, which has these highly ascetic revolutionaries that sleep on nails and stay awake for days. Lenin cited that book as a model for himself. The workers on the project sacrificing themselves for the project resembles this, and it also anticipates the social realist style that stalin promoted when he came to power in the late 1920s.

>>539894
IDK where you live, but my company has at least two direct competitors who are often hiring. If my place doesn't make with the bonuses, I can easily move. I don't because:
1. Lazy
2. They know I could and pay me well.

>>534192
But it's a business loan, and for a business loan a million dollars is about standard.
When he says tiny loan he means a tiny business loan in the grand scheme of things.

>>540023
I live in one of the most economically free first world nations.

Our underemployment rate has been 60% since the 1990s.

>>540090
Not that guy, but which one out of curiosity?

>>534438
>People who have a lot of debt inherently don't want to rock the boat.


No, people who have a lot of debt inherently want to radicalize into a political structure where their debts will be ignored, forgiven, or are impossible to enforce.

It's people who are heavily invested in the system, the creditors, who don't want to rock the boat.

>>540105
Australia. It is economically freer than the United States.

There was very heavy intervention from the United States, even before ww2 was over. Although our activity in Asia and South America is more infamous, Europe was the primary focus of not only CIA special operations, but massive investment in the form of the marshall plan.

>>540134
>>540090


Good job adding an extra 0 to the unemployment figures.

File: 1452383921316.jpg (140KB, 765x1024px) Image search: [Google]

140KB, 765x1024px

>>534293
>Notch
>one in a million genius

>>540152
>Good job adding an extra 0 to the unemployment figures.
1 hour of work or study a fourtnight disqualifies you from the unemployment figures in Australia.

Underemployment is commonly agreed to be that high.

Youth unemployment, officially, peaks at 60 in some suburbs.

>>534051
>Capitalism doesn't exist
There are real-life reactionaries on this board

>>540183
lfpr=/=unemployment

>>540211
>I am an illiterate cunt
Back to >>>/biz/ with you

Labour force non participation in Australia means a crippling and intense poverty.

And underemployment includes not only the partially studying or working, and not only the disheartened, but people employed below their most competitive skill set.

>>540231
>I am an illiterate cunt
Back to wherever the fuck you came from with you
"Underemployment" is only meaningful insofar as the underemployed are employed yet seeking a position, thus providing downward pressure on wages (although less than would be provided from an unemployed wage-seeker). Underemployment numbers are collected by sample and not by population (in contrast with unemployment) and are usually done in reference to part-time workers, with the question amounting to "do you want more hours".
Since underemployment numbers are ephemeral and expensive to study, these weak indicators are adopted instead. Your "underemployment" rate has nothing to do with the bullshit you're spouting.
And labor-force non-participation trends to mid/high-income households than low-income ones as a matter of function, and simply means that you are otherwise considered able to work (a legal adult, not collecting disability/retirement).
Kill yourself.

>>540260
>"Underemployment" is only meaningful insofar as the underemployed are employed yet seeking a position, thus providing downward pressure on wages

I like the way you delete subjectivity entirely.

>>540260
>And labor-force non-participation trends to mid/high-income households than low-income ones as a matter of function
>as a matter of function

Empirically it is exactly the opposite with long term unemployment.

I look forward to the day when you get shot for counter revolutionary conspiracy.

>>540271
What? Didn't I tell you to kill yourself?

>>540275
You cited empirical evidence but you didn't post any.

Also,
http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/[email protected]/mf/6265.0
>Underemployed workers are defined as part-time workers who want, and are available for more hours of work than they currently have, and full-time workers who worked part-time hours during the reference week for economic reasons (such as being stood down or insufficient work being available).

>>540279
Given that you're such an expert on Australia you'd already have used ABS regarding SEO and long term unemployment.

Oh wait, you're entirely unfamiliar with the least empirical work on Australia and you'll suggest that if someone is registered as long term unemployed then they're a labour market participant.

Go fuck yourself with a hot knife.

>>540298
>as a matter of function

Empirical reality still doesn't exist for you does it?

>>540302
>Given that you're such an expert on Australia you'd already have used ABS regarding SEO and long term unemployment.
I never said anything about unemployment, only lfpr, illiterate cunt. And you'd be hard pressed to demonstrate how a long-term non-participant would be able to live in a small household with no income stream, unless Australian unemployment insurance programs pay out generously and indefinitely to non-disabled non-elderly single-households and I've been horribly misinformed.

>Go fuck yourself with a hot knife.
Come to the realization that individuals who ascribe to ideologies prescribing mass movement usually have crippling self-esteem issues. Or kill yourself like I said to earlier.

>>540316
I have. You haven't. I've not really made strong claims which would require empirical evidence, I'm mostly pointing that the conclusions you've drawn from an ill-informed reading of data are specious due to a massive disconnect between the terminology and your use of it. You (or whoever you're coming to the support of), however, have made multiple strong claims that would require empirical evidence, yet none has been produced.

>>533970
Marx and Engels' work was mostly based the living conditions of the working class in Manchester and Lancashire. The working class of these areas lived in utter destitution and were demanding reforms by the parliament.The working class organized Chartist movements, strikes, and unions, but the parliament struck down their demands. After 1848, the economy began to recover, and workers' interest in the movements steadily declined.

File: 7126456.jpg (680KB, 2192x1576px) Image search: [Google]

680KB, 2192x1576px

>>539621
Arguably we still live in what Marx would describe as times of primitive accumulation, and have not reached the point where industrial capitalism is dominant. You point out the expansion of debt which is arguably not an apparatus of the industrialists who recognize it as an inherently unsustainable practice, but is rather something used by bankers to extract wealth from the economy. Marx anticipated that these bankers, and anyone who uses predatory methods to extract wealth rather than produce it, would be done away with in time by the industrialists or subordinated to them as tool by which to provide the credit necessary to expand the economy. Think banks in Bismarck's Germany or in modern day China where they serve to provide the capital necessary for industrial expansion.

Today, and the majority of the past 500-2000 years, wealthy individuals used their resources to buy up what are essentially privileges to charge tolls on resources like land, insurance, and finances. Marx, building on the traditions set forth by classical economists like Adam Smith and the Physiocrats, thought that parasitism needed to be swept away before the next phase of economic growth led by the industrialists could occur. If we are to believe that Marx thought that the world he lived in was going to move into this phase because of the "industrial revolution" he was hopelessly optimistic since we can see that the same people who dominated the economy before it moved on to dominate it afterwards.

It is disheartening to see just how entrenched those "toll booth operators" are, but it still does seem like industrialist might decide to work with the government to regulate or dismantle the institutions created by the few who have either lucked or cheated into the privileges that they receive. It would be a true "industrial revolution" if it did occur, but we might have to wait a while since there seems to be a concerted effort to unlearn the lessons of the past 200 years.

>>534309

VOTE COLONEL SANDERS

>>539885
>The free market will take care of these things as long as there is a well running economy.

>this will all work out as long as the system doesn't work exactly as its intended to

>>534309
Literally only a small percentage of people are actually supposed to go to college. That was the intention, appealing to the semi-small group of nerds and weirdos who wanted to do more school.
The rest was for the military.

>>534192
>he's posting on 4chan
>doesn't realise he's part of the 1%
kek

>>534115
top lel

>>534768
5 star post completely spot on right here.

>>540196

Using the word reactionary is 99% proof you're a deterministic le smug asshole.