Explain to me why workers shouldn't own the places they

>>132988876

If you are self employed, purchase your own materials, purchase your own workspace and tools, and spend your own time, you can own your own products.

If you work a someone else's workspace, produce using their purchased supplies, with tools they purchased, you do not own that product.

Hey OP, why don't you and your commie buddies pool your resources together to start your own business?

Or better yet, why don't you quit your job and find one of the millions of established employee-owned businesses?

>>132988876
you can buy stock at the place you work.

>>132988876
The concept of work is to provide the "other half" of the deal (aka manager to worker, vice versa) by either collecting resources or assembling them. However, issues with ethics and the actual reason for management when burger flipper, to truck driver, thru middle management are considered regular workers.

TL;DR
Workers and managers support each other but gets unfair at an industrial level (McDonald's)

>>132988876
>the workers should own the places they work at
>so let's take the workplaces away from the workers and hand them over to the government so that the government has capital to employ people, but the workers do not
>also we do not want the workers owning the places they work since we don't want them do whatever they want with the workplace that they own, like employing people to work for them
:^)

>>132988876
>Explain to me why workers shouldn't own the places they work.
why should they?

>>132988876
Gather a couple of your fellows and try making it work.
Except it won't because otherwise that would be the rule already.

>>132988876

>youre boss is your slave master! Support communism!

>*overthrow the old order and establish communist utopia

>now bureaucrat is your slave master. Speak out and go to gulag

>>132988876
Dumb commie.

>>132988876
> Communism is an inherently flawed economic practice

That's my 2 cents on the matter

>>132988876
Why don't they buy it then

Explain to me why commies are so fucking retarded

>>132990056
Autism

>>132989674
You're confusing/conflating workers and capitalists.

File: 468dcbdfe9abbe5f85aafd79b0cb13be.png (145KB, 400x367px) Image search: [Google]

145KB, 400x367px

>>132989204
Thanks, but you didn't answer OP's question.

File: Broud Gommie.jpg (143KB, 1024x683px) Image search: [Google]

143KB, 1024x683px

>>132988876
Because resources cost money you imbecile troglodyte.
If you can't affort it, well tough luck, you'll just have to work under someone who can. Or do you commie fucks actually think that the MoP just spawn out of nowhere?
>Sage

>>132988876
That's the beauty of capitalism, go start a co-op.

>>132990088
If the workers own the place they work at, they can choose to do what they want with their workplace, like deciding to become the managers of the workplace to oversee other workers so they can grow their capital and increase their business benefiting everyone.
Communist pieces of shit talk a lot about ownership yet seem to have zero idea what ownership even means.

why would you own something someone else paid for?
You didn't build the factory or your workplace
You didn't fund the creation or came up with the idea for the workplace

Retarded commie is retarded

>>132990113
>resources cost money

You fell for the exchange value spook

>>132990056
Because they throw themselves into this "gimmie free shit mentality" so much to the point that they believe that anyone who is better off than them inherintly owes them something.

They own the bussiness because they invested in the capital. They own the capital. They hired the workforce. THEY OWN THE FUCKING BUSSINESS YOU NIGGERTARD

Because workers would murder eachother if that was the case

File: 1471305643048.jpg (25KB, 713x481px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 713x481px

unions destroy everything they touch
>dude give me 6 hour workday and 20 dollar minimum wage
>wtf why is everything made in China where are muh jarbs!?!?!

>>132988876
You are asking the wrong question.If a capitalist wants to start a business, they basically never do it by investing their own capital. They do it by taking out a loan from a bank and then paying that bank interest on the loan. Banks do not actually lend the capitalist the capital, they create it out of nothing through a process called 'fractional reserve banking.' New capital is created, not lent, when a "loan" is taken out. The question you should ask is why should the interest payments from the creation of new capital go to enrich private individuals and not be "socialized" for the benefit of everyone, to fund the government without taxation of the people for example? (((Karl Marx))) never asked that question, and may not have understood how finance actually works

>>132988876
because without the capital the business wouldn't exist

>>132990450
>they invested in the capital
There is no capital without labor friendo

File: 1475475355338.jpg (73KB, 399x395px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 399x395px

>>132990089
Because it is someone Else's property.

>>132988876
1: "Should" has no place in the discussion of natural rights. Either you have them or you do not. The right to property is one such right rationally derived from nature.

2: If you do not believe in the right to property then why ought the workers to own their places of work? Are you implying that there is a right to own property collectively, but not individually? If so, why? Upon what grounds do you make this claim?

3: Why shouldn't a person be allowed to utilize his resources as he pleases if it harms nobody? By what moral law do you claim that owning a business is an act of violence? If I build an oven but I require a helper to operate it, why should that oven become equally his as it is mine when it was my resources that allowed its construction?

Why do you think that you have the philosophic legitimacy to demand answers of me, when it is YOU who are proposing revolutionary action? Clearly the burden of argument falls upon you, not me.

>>132990353
Value can be empirically derived, and Max Stirner was not a real philosopher.

>>132990353
calling something a spook is not an argument

if you really think everything is a spook then you might as well stop posting entirely

>>132990492

Don't blame the unions.

>>132990679
1: "Should" has no place in the discussion of natural rights. Either you have them or you do not. The right to property is one such right rationally derived from nature

Explain banking

>>132988876
Every one prefers to be his own boss. The only reason that someone would work for someone else would be that they derive a higher income from the employer than they could earn self employed. If anyone is being exploited, it is the business owner. He is paying his workers more than they could generate through their own efforts.

>>132988876
explain to me why non-white humanoids should be classed as 'people'

>>132988876
>Why should someone own a business simply because they hold capital?
They own the business because they own the capital (or have control of it if the fiat-jews own it). A group of 10000 average joes cant own the business because they will never all agree on decisions.

>>132988876
Bootstraping a business is OK too, capital just makes things easier to grow. Cooperative ownership has nothing to do with it.

>>132988876
Because capital is not magic pixie dust that appears out of nowhere.

>>132988876
Fuck off you mong

>>132990766
>>132990866
>>132990266
>>132990088
Heh

It's called owning stock.

>>132990653
this is getting real deep man.

>>132988876
>Flag
>Obvious troll
Man invests tons of his own money to start a company, buy tools, machines or whatever. Employs people for their work.
>Somehow entitles the workers to own the place with zero risk
Do commies really believe this? Fucking children.

>>132988876
>Explain to me why workers shouldn't own the places they work
Implying they're not allowed to
>Why should someone own a business simply because they hold capital?
because freedom.

>>132990837
Of what relevance is the admittedly corrupt banking establishment to the existence of property rights?

Hired a small biz company to do my yard work. Worked for me for 10 years. Employee of biz leaves to start his own biz. Tries to get me to use his biz because he worked on my yard for 3 years. Tell him no because previous employer biz has been top notch for past 10 years. Previous biz hired ethnic worker to replace him. Does same good job. Why should I hire you to do the job when I am no disappoint with previous company. He be mad. Wave to him when I see him driving on roads. Now he gives me finger when he sees me. I feel like I made a good decision regardless what this millennial jitterbug thinks.

>>132990679
>the right to property is one such right rationally derived from nature

The right to property yes, the right to private property, no.

>If you do not believe in the right to property then why ought the workers to own their places of work? Are you implying that there is a right to own property collectively, but not individually? If so, why? Upon what grounds do you make this claim?

Yes, there is a right to own private property collectively (as in the whole of society) because productive property belongs to the entire society. When people meme "workers own the means of production" they mean the means of production are owned socially and choices are made democratically. The grounds upon which I make this claim is that the foundational basis of the stake associated with
private property is arbitrary and from a historical perspective, only enforced with ruthless force against the majority of the population, which is unjust.

>3: Why shouldn't a person be allowed to utilize his resources as he pleases if it harms nobody? By what moral law do you claim that owning a business is an act of violence? If I build an oven but I require a helper to operate it, why should that oven become equally his as it is mine when it was my resources that allowed its construction?

You should be able to utilize resources if it harms nobody. But the act of owning a business is an act of violence because you have expropriated social production that belongs to the entirety of society for yourself and have thus deprived the entirety of society of the right to decide where that socially useful excess production ought to go.

If you build an oven, the resources you extracted to build it (iron, magnesium, etc) belong to the entirety of society and as a result, society has a claim to that oven if you are not solely using it for your personal (use value) benefit

>>132988876
Because if they owned the business they would no longer simply be workers would they. They would be business owners.
> Whats stopping that working owner from hiring a worker do do his task "nothing"
>You create a subcontract nightmare where the man on the bottom makes NOTHING.

>>132990653

Yeah if I start my own business it comes from my own labour.

>I work
>I earn
>I buy propterty
>I produce goods
>I can now pay workers
>repeat cycle

Capitalism works because it creates incentive for independance. Communism is good for niggers

>>132988876

They should own it because they hold all the capital. They invested in it, put their efforts into it, and grew it to a point where he needed people to handle the minutiae that's below his or her expertise

This is called "capitalism" and unlike your shitty fairy tale system, it actually works and doesn't kill millions of people in its implementation, you fucking communist hack.

>>132988876
Explain why they should. Inb4 muh capitalists profit off of their labor surplus.
Yes they do. And in exchange they pay workers for their labor. What gives a worker the right to steal someone else's property?

Mutual interest

>>132990866

I used to believe something like this in the past, but if you carefully examine the economic environment today, you would realize that it's significantly harder to stay afloat starting your own business today than it would have been several decades ago.

A lot of the successful businesses today come from opening shop at the right time. If they had to start over today, I'd be willing to bet my right nutsack that they wouldn't be successful.

>>132988876
They are free to self employ them selves instead of stealing someone elses property.

Work in a cpitalist society is done in mind of the contract of the employer and employee.

The employer owns the means of production, the raw materials and manages the sales.

Thus what right does some lazy fuck have to try and steal that property?

Communis hasn't and will never work.

>>132991318
>if I start my own business it comes from my own labor

Nothing wrong until "I can now pay workers" largely because you are not paying them for the full value of their labor.

>50+ replies

Explain to me why summer posters reply to bait.

>>132989204
first post best post

>>132991384
>they hold the capital
The capital is formed from natural resources which belong to the entirety of society, not the person who arbitrarily signs a deed for it

>it doesn't kill millions of people
Lmao tell that to the entirety of Latin America, Africa, and the Middle East

>>132991511
If workers were not paid for the full value of their labor they would not be working there and would find a better job, or employ themselves since their labor is so valuable.

>>132990089
he answered it in the best and most simple way.
is deny that property exists, please now hand over your PC, your lunchbox and your legoblocks you fucking schoolyard bolshevik.

File: 6F00A508-54B3-40E4-B767-FAA1CB8C3464-639-00000180EFABB7AE.png (40KB, 633x508px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 633x508px

>>132990089

He did.

>>132991053
"Capital is not pixie dust that appears out of nowhere"

Wrong, fool. It is created out of nothing by central banks and through fractional reserve lending.

>>132991707
If workers were being paid the full value of their labor, how would the capitalist make any money? Wouldn't every dime go to the workers and none to the owner of capital?

By definition, workers can't be paid the full value of their labor in a capitalist system or the capitalist gets nothing

>>132988876
Because they couldn't manage it effectively and it is the owner's property, it is their genius that created this effective business. If the workers really don't like working for some intelligent, industrious, genetically superior guy who holds his rightful place in the hierarchy the workers can open a partnership, but of course they are all too dumb to actually make anything work without some sort of authoritarian, communism can't even work, and needs an autocratic, tyrannical dictator to actually hold itself together for the few years before people either become tired of their bullshit and realize they were duped for power and rebel, or the state runs out of money and natural resources because of their inefficient system and then the whole Goddamn thing collapses. Marxism as an idea is ridiculous and there are a lot of other faults with their ideology to the point where anybody who unironically identifies themselves as a Marxist is retarded.

File: Bane.jpg (63KB, 471x710px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 471x710px

>>132991250
>The right to property yes, the right to private property, no.
Why? The distinction is clearly arbitrary.

>Yes, there is a right to own private property collectively (as in the whole of society) because productive property belongs to the entire society.
Why? The distinction is clearly arbitrary. On what grounds do you make this claim?

>The grounds upon which I make this claim is that the foundational basis of the stake associated with private property is arbitrary and from a historical perspective, only enforced with ruthless force against the majority of the population, which is unjust.
I fail to see how collective ownership of the means of production is any less arbitrary than individual ownership. Societies don't exist, there is no societal personhood. A "society" is merely a group of individuals who live near each other and sometimes interact.

>You should be able to utilize resources if it harms nobody. But the act of owning a business is an act of violence because you have expropriated social production that belongs to the entirety of society for yourself and have thus deprived the entirety of society of the right to decide where that socially useful excess production ought to go.
On what grounds can you claim the collective ownership of all resources in society? What is the basis for this argument? Society does not exist, I have never seen one in nature and I can think of no rights that a non-person could have.

Personhood entails the right to property. What is yours is yours. There is no animal called "society" that has the right to property. The closest that exists is the State. By what right can the state own property, but an individual cannot?

>>132991511

Nor was I before I started my own business. But my workers have economic freedom to continue the cycle.

>>132991707

The problem is that mass immigration has devalued labor.

>>132991778
Lmao so capital didn't exist before central banks?

>>132991511
Except it's the market itself which determines the value of the labor they put into their jobs, not some greedy business owner. Money is a unit of measurement for value, much like pounds is a unit of measurement for weight. You can't make a feather weigh more by arbitrarily assigning more pounds to it, and you can't make a job worth more value by arbitrarily assigning more money to jobs that aren't worth that much.

>>132988876
LTV is a nice idea twisted to try to implement absolutely retarded systems like ancom

Capitalism sucks but at least shit gets done and we're not all wallowing in our own drum circle squalor like commies want

>>132991209
Thats not how it works. A man will invest 10% capital and get the other 90% from the banking system. The bankimg system creates the 90% from nothing.

>>132990581
This is the best answer. While using the interest on the new capital to fund government might work. The problem comes from the source. The money can never pay itself back due to interest attached to its creation. A dollar out of thin air with a 1% interest rate can never pay back $1.01.

Interest, or rather debt backed currency is naturally inflationary and therefore naturally vertical funneling over time as less and less people are able to stay ahead of the depreciation of the currency.

If you were in an interview for a job, how would you like to be evaluated? By how much stuff you have? (Asset or gold backed currency). What you promise to do? (Debt backed currency). Or what you yourself have actually done? (GDP or labor backed currency).

The latter is what Germany did between 1932 and 1939. Interest free labor treasury certificate notes could only be issued by the treasury to pay for the labor to construct public works. The autobahn was funded this way. Labor treasury certificates were redeemable in marks and vise versa, like gold used to be. So basically the treasury department could issue notes and buy them back to keep the economy level without boom-crash cycles. In 7 years, Germany went from europes poorest economy to the world's 2nd largest.

>>132991814
exactly and how would be reinvestment or upgrading the machines or any technological advancement we possible if every dollar went to the worker.
ah right it's not possible, that why socialist economies stagnate, then fall into recession.
hmm.. really tickles my porperty right.

>>132991816

> it is their genius that created this effective business

So opening a shitty convenience store in the 80s-90s and netting $6 million in cash is "genius"?

I'd like to have what your smoking.
If my uncle were so smart and a "genius", how come he didn't catch on to the fact that the internet and amazon, in particular, would steal all his business? Why didn't he create his own internet store?

Running a successful business is 90% luck.

>>132991250

>the act of owning a business is an act of violence

have you actually said this out loud once and listened to yourself?

>>132988876
>Explain to me why workers shouldn't own the places they work.

Own? I thought communists don't believe in property. Owning something is fundamentally connected with property. If you believe in property after all, seizing someone else's property is fine, all is fair in love and war. But since it's hostile takeover, you might encounter some resistance.
May the best man win.

>>132988876
Because workers are dumb, corrupt and unable to organize effectively by themselves.

>>Why should someone own a business simply because they hold capital?
>Why should someone own a business simply because they have started it

What are you dumb?

>>132991814
That doesn't even make sense, and you don't even know what capitalism is.
>workers can't be paid the full value of their labor in a capitalist system
When you actually understand what words mean what you are essentially saying is that the only way a worker can get paid what he deserves for their labor is if the government has a complete monopoly on the production. Which we know is false since governments are incredibly inefficient, and even if they weren't they still need to make a profit because you can't operate at a loss forever.
You don't even know what you are saying. You're just spewing words.

>>132991814
But that is incorrect. The only empirical value of labor that has yet been found is the market value. How much you sell something for--by definition--is its value. Every worker who agrees to a wage is selling his labor for the value of that labor.

The Labor Theory of Value did not even need to be debunked because no evidence for it ever existed. Literally inventing a new definition of value that cannot be tested or analyzed is not sound economics.

File: 1362696990696.jpg (52KB, 448x419px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 448x419px

>>132988876

>Explain to me why workers shouldn't own the places they work.

they could, it's called cooperation, however most workers are mindless twats with no marketing and management skills and would probably run the said business to the ground

>Why should someone own a business simply because they hold capital?

because they have the vision and the skill to make a good enough portfolio to convince the holders of capital, he is a good investment

>Explain to me why workers shouldn't own the places they work.
>Why should someone own a business simply because they hold capital?

You either starve businesses of the capital they need to industrialize, buy machinery, make improvements, expand, buy real estate, buy materials, and other infrastructure, or you have to hyper restrict the flow of workers, as removing an incompetent or evil owner is very difficult..

Existing labor unions COULD collectively and continuously use dues to buy stock in whatever companies their members worked at. But they don't. And economically it's a terrible idea for them to do so.

>>132990088
The distinction is artificial.

>>132990581
I find it amazing that marxists are so focused on economic principles, but seem to understand them so poorly. Was fractional reserve banking in widespread use in Marx's age?

>>132992019
Sounds like your uncle didn't realize the world changing around him and failed to change with it.

>>132988876
>Why should someone own a business simply because they hold capital?
they don't hold the capital if they bought the means of production already, they hold the means of production as an investment, the workers hold minor shares in the assets wealth by working there and get paid dividends
youre saying that those with the least stock in a company should own the most inexplicably

>>132988876

In most businesses you can't put any random person you find and expect it to be succesful.

Many people could own their own business but choose not to. Why?

Because it's an investment that is extremely risky and time consuming. So people choose to have a safer option, which is to work for someone else with a fixed salary.

Not everyone who own a business is a super rich guy that can spend all the money he wants in businesses.

>>132992159
So collective bargaining objectively makes workers better?

File: 1499517417381.jpg (227KB, 600x849px) Image search: [Google]

227KB, 600x849px

>>132988876
This graphic explains a lot.

>>132988876
tell me why someone shouldnt be allowed to sign a contract that gets them x money for y work

>Hurr durr I like this therefore its mine gibs me that

- Commie logic

>>132991228
"What is the relevance of fractional reserve bankimg to property rights"

Fractional reserve banking is a legal construct by which society allows new property/capital to be created out of thin air. The question is why the benefits of that process should be private. Private property is fully compatible with public banking. Why should bankers get free stuff they did not work for because of a government program called fractional reserve?

>>132991826
>the distinction is clearly arbitrary
No it is not, it is based on the difference between use value and exchange value which is calculated in excess of that use value.

Private property is that productive property which creates value in excess of its use value and funnels that to its owner.

A shovel you use to build a garden in your backyard does not create value in excess of the use value of the shovel. A shovel you give to a working landscaper/employee as the owner of a landscaping business does.

>I fail to see how collective ownership of the means of production is any less arbitrary than individual ownership.

Because there is democratic control and input from all of society to which the means of production ultimately belong as opposed to no accountability and direction in the hands of an individual owner.

>On what grounds can you claim the collective ownership of all resources in society?

Because all resources belong to society as a whole and the alternative is an arbitrary claims process based on force of arms and intense violence directed towards the vast majority.

>Society does not exist
Not sure how I can help you if you don't believe in the concept of society - humans are social animals who rely upon one and other for development and advancement and survival

>>132992296
Communists have a problem with it being voluntary.
If there was no contract and people were forced to do y to get x, they would be ok with it. These ''people'' want literal slavery.

File: 1492914478956.jpg (145KB, 960x823px) Image search: [Google]

145KB, 960x823px

>>132991930

Stalin knew to get shit done in only 5 years

>>132991872
No it's the market that determines the exchange value of the commodity produced by labor, which has the purpose of obfuscating the fact that actual/use value comes only from labor.

This means that the worker is not compensated for the full value of the labor the input

>>132988876
They can if they want to but in most cases they don't. They can buy stock so what's your point?

>>132992200

I agree, but that fact that he's financially successful from opening his own business doesn't mean he's a "genius". He was just lucky to be born at a time when there weren't 50 immigrants around each block doing the same exact shit.

Anyone claiming that the younger generation today has the same opportunities to make money as the older generations did several decades ago is either a moron or a liar.

File: jew.jpg (17KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 480x360px

>>132988876
Because God owns workers and everything else.
Checkmate niggertheists

>>132991992
Depends on which school of socialist thought you follow:

(1) In syndicalism, the union/workers' council makes the decision as to how much money will go towards investment/R&D as opposed to the capitalist.

(2) In a planned economy, the planners make that decision based on democratic input from the entire population

Also, the Soviet Union had a far higher % of its GDP as investment than almost any capitalist economy other than Japan. The fact that capitalist economies continuously underinvest in the future is actually one of the best arguments for socialism

>>132992033
Idk man our current society perpetuates violence on a massive scale rn. What I'm saying doesn't sound so silly in that light

>>132988876

>Why should someone own a business simply because they hold capital?

Since freedom is pretty fuckin' important to most people, you should explain why they shouldn't own a business if the hold capital.

Then again, screw other people who need products, services, and jobs. Maybe the guy who holds capital should just live on his principal and not invest it in anything except their own needs.

You idiot.

>>132991854
"Capital didnt exist before central banks" before fractional reserve banking, you would have to put up 100% of the capital, or actually loan it at 1:1 from someone else. With fractional reserve, you lut down 1p% and the other 90% is created by a bamk. Im not saying fractional reserve is a bad thing, I am asking why the benefits of it should go to private individuals, or what moral right private individuals & banks have to captial created through a legal fiction

>>132992121
>falling for the profit spook

The goal of a socialist economy and a capitalist one are not the same and should not be thought of in the same way. "Profitability" is not the goal of a socialist economy any more than meeting the needs of the destitute is the goal of a capitalist economy.

>the only way a worker can get paid what he deserves for their labor is if the government has a complete monopoly on production

Now you're getting it. Read Cockshott next

File: 1499604504613.gif (388KB, 500x382px) Image search: [Google]

388KB, 500x382px

>>132988876
>Explain to me why workers shouldn't own the places they work.
Because they assumed no risk or effort by starting up the company in the first place and getting it going, and then they essentially want to go in and steal it because they manage to get themselves employed at the fucking company? Are you on stupid pills?

Start your own fucking company if you want to own it literally nothing is stopping you except for your lack of effort, genuine ideas etc. Being an employee is 100x simpler than starting a business finding a market location, having a brilliant idea and assuming all the risk whilst it's starting up if it fails its all on you..

That's why employees are easier to replace than employers. That's the first part.

>Why should someone own a business simply because they hold capital?
That's now why they hold capital you dumb fuck, how you start a business is usually by lending from a bank or related because you have a good idea and they can see that you can make good on the loan, if you fuck up it's all on you and you go under.. if you succeed, you pay back the loan through customers liking your product, then you start accruing capital to perhaps hire additional employees, you know JOBS.. creating JOBS.. and perhaps expanding your business if you continue to do really well and people like your product etc.

That's how people come to owning businesses. And you want to be a neet that goes.. hurr durr.. a) you have to employ me or you're a fascist and have to pay me a high salary, also i need to control your company now otherwise you are a filthy capitalist burgoise that must be suppressed.

>>132991707
Because they wouldn't find a better job because all capitalists are greedy fat jews

>>132989851
>>132989674
Strawman

>>132992159
>the only empirical value of labor that has been yet found is its market value

Have you heard of linear programming? Because that's just totally incorrect

Even Mises conceded that calculating labor time-value is the only feasible substitute for a market-based price system.

Both communism and capitalism are the same memes with different mechanisms

>>132991250
>If you build an oven, the resources you extracted to build it (iron, magnesium, etc) belong to the entirety of society

If I'm mining iron that otherwise would not have been mined, because of others' unwillingness, ignorance or simple laziness, they don't have any claim to the iron I've worked hard to discover and mine.

File: 1483028253312.jpg (178KB, 1200x550px) Image search: [Google]

178KB, 1200x550px

>>132988876
Explain to me why workers shouldn't hang all communists and watch as they kick around?
It's in their own best interest.

Also why would communists want workers to own the means of production? What will communists do? Starve to death? I don't get it.

>>132988876
Because if they did not pay for any of the equipment, did not create any of the machines or in general had no investment beforehand, the workplace is not their property. It could be if a company forced its employees to buy shares/distributed shares to employees as a form of payment.

>1 post by this id
+ 1 sage for you sir

>>132990290
Yet the continuous input of time and labor comes from workers. Why should a manager by default take all the profits simply because he put in the first investment?

>>132993137
Why are you assuming that they were unwilling to mine it?

The reality is that basically all stakes to natural resources are enforced through the violence of the bourgeois state and taken by mass corporations, not small business owners.

No small business or single-employee business has a totally vertically integrated supply chain because it's literally impossible

>>132992701
See my previous post.>>132991242
I agree the newer biz starts have it rough, because they compete with already established services/goods.

File: lmao.gif (2MB, 360x316px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 360x316px

>>132993141
>Also why would communists want workers to own the means of production? What will communists do? Starve to death? I don't get it.
Exactly what they did under the soviets in one example some farmers were declared to be burgoise and creating inequality because they were good at farming, so they were sent to the gulag.. the people who then ran the farms didn't know shit about farming so the crops failed, millions starved.. welcome to communism, the 1o1 how to take something that works and wreck it completely till the entire society stops functioning and falls apart.

>the pic, it's real
HAHAHA

File: 1489715813327.png (249KB, 466x660px) Image search: [Google]

249KB, 466x660px

>>132988876
Ayn Rand said it best
"[...]An Industrialist..., blank out there is so such person. A factory is a natural resource. Like a tree or a mud puddle"

>>132992905
>what moral right do private individuals and banks have to capital created through legal fiction

They don't have one.

>>132992788
>Be communist
>Call capitalist owning business 'violent'
>Excuse it by blaming society that perpetuates violence
>Most violent groups in society are commie groups (just see Hamburg)
You people have a very warped sense of reasoning. The thing that annoys me the most is that you could be fighting for the right things, like calibrating salaries better or fair working hours, or full transparency on economic deals done by the elites, instead you spout random incoherent bullshit that makes problems worse and blame things that aren't to blame.
You are the definition of useful idiots.

>>132991872
Isn't the market dictated by the leading companies, owned by some greedy businessmen?

>>132990492
Oh yeah it sure was great when workers literally risked their lives and wellbeing at work while receiving paltry wages.

>>132993454
>most violent groups in society are commie groups

Massive corporations have dealt death and despair to millions of people the world over and yet you complain about black bloc kiddies?

You are the one with a warped sense of reasoning

>>132993279
explain how extremely replaceable workers are more important than the irreplaceable creator? prove to me that the workers are more than meat cogs

>>132992191
"Was fractional reserve banking in widespread use in Marx's age?"

Yes, fractional reserve banking was essentially invented by the Knights Templar. They started acting as a bank for pilgrims along to the to Jerusalem who didnt want to risk their gold being stolen enroute. Eventually the Tempar "gold certificates" came to be accepted "as good as gold," and the Templars realized they could create 10x as many "gold certificates" as they has actual gold, because less than 10% of certificate holders would redeem them at the same time. Fractional reserve banking has been prevalent since the Middle Ages.

>>132993586
>issa wite gabbidalism whats makes me po' an makes mah nine keeds stahve!

>log on to /pol/
>"politically incorrect"
>countless posters shilling for neoliberal capitalist status quo

Really activates the almonds

>>132993586
Take it out on the massive corporations then, retard. More or less what I proposed, but you're too fucking stupid to get. They have almost nothing to do with the normal 'business owner' you buy bread and clothes from. They fuck those too, trust me. But if you went up against the massive corps, it would mean you go up against your bosses, since you and your black bloc buddies are nothing but pawns of theirs.
Once again, useful idiots.

>>132993282
>Why are you assuming that they were unwilling to mine it?
What? I didn't. I gave 2 other possible reasons.
I wonder what your "argument" would've looked like if I replaced unwillingness with inability.
You just couldn't go 2 sentences without throwing buzzwords everywhere could you?

>>132993282
Well yes, monopolies do form quite often in resource gathering jobs, sadly. Especially if the recourses are valuable. His point still stands though, if he mined it, it should be considered his property. If he mined it for a company it's the companies property (basically he sold the resource for money to the company).

In a 'perfect' capitalist society anyone could set up a mining company, everyone would have equal opportunity. In reality, monopolies do tend to form, therefore we need regulation. But it is absurd to claim iron you did not help to get as your own property just because it's hard to compete in the real world, in my mind, because that would mean equity and not equality.

>>132993279
Every single time you cocksuckers open your mouth, you just spew one after another after another evidence that you have never been a part of working party in your entire life. Your entire asinine ideology constantly demonstrates that you are not a part of working class, never were, nor you plan to be.
The person at the top decides what will get made and for whom it will get made. Without his wish I, my party, my engineers, grinders, welders, drivers will just sit around doing sweet fuck all.
Are you really that retarded?

>>132993661
If there were no workers available, what would the "creator" do?

By contrast, any worker or group of workers can become a "creator" with the right idea and availability of resources

File: 1498429961023.png (66KB, 510x332px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 510x332px

>>132993279
>Yet the continuous input of time and labor comes from workers. Why should a manager by default take all the profits simply because he put in the first investment?
What's a salary also you clearly have zero experience or even general understanding of what it takes to run a business, there's ALL kinds of ressource costs related to what product or service it is being sold, employee insurance/health care, also what is YOUR SALARY and the salary of all the other ones that work there, there's ups and downs in sales and many many other things that constantly needs to be juggled and dealt with behind the scenes.

The solution instead of trying to hijack other peoples company simply for them wanting to employ you, is to have you and all your commie friends do a joint venture, each pitching in for the startup capital, then you LITERALLY in every way own the business and go through all the hardship of starting it up and getting it running, then you can split the profit amongst yourselves evenly, ofcourse you'll realize very quickly all the additional costs with running a company so you'll probably end up something close to what a normal employer would take for him/herself and split it even steven amongst yourself but hey..

ofcourse then you have to hire employees and then things might get dicey for you when they want to claim that they own it JUST as much as you.

>>132988876
it goes further than ownership
if commies seized everything the tech progress would effectively cease because noone in their right mind would apply himself to do his best (absence of proverbial carrots); an example of this is evident for USSR where the only near-parity happened in MIC
you'd also need to spread the commie cancer all over the planet at the same time so everyone would be condemned to exist in the same open prison without possibility of defection into a meritocratic society

>>132988876
Because workers are fucking stupid, and can't make group decisions. You stupid fucking commie.

>>132993661

>Implying most business owners are creators.

Most business owners are repackagers and exchangers, not creators. They were lucky and established themselves when there weren't 50 trillion immigrants around every city doing the same exact shit.

If they were to start over today, they would all go bankrupt from having to compete with immigrants willing to do their service for half-off.

>>132993586
>>132993586
Shush, no one mentions Henry Ford assassinating people for land and their rubber trees to keep rubber cheap for Murica anymore. Damn whistleblower.

>>132993810
>Being 'politically incorrect' means I have to be retarded and support communism
>Flag
Just 'log out', please.

>>132988876
Ownership brings responsibility to manage the owned resources effectively. Successful business owners have empirically demonstrated their capacity to manage such resources, ordinary workers have not.

>>132988876
Were the workers there to do the leg work? Get the permits, hire and over-see the construction of the buildings? Did they set up the systems from the beginning? Did they open bank accounts in their name? Did they perches the equipment necessary for the work? No? The fuck off.

>>132993859
the reason workers even exist is because we do not have the machinery currently to replace people in every single job. making a product is a low skill job compared to managing and financing a business. why are low skill manufacturers entitled to the fruits of someone else's labour?

>>132993474
it was

>>132993661
>irreplaceable creator

Perhaps narcissist executives believe they are "irreplaceable creators", but most of them didn't create the business and they are very replaceable, that's why they hop around companies all the time through nepotism.

>>132993934
shitskin immigrants who work for nothing aren't let in by capitalists, they're let in by retarded socialist governments who want voters for life

>>132993752
What accent are you imitating? Gungan?

Anyway, megacorps have killed millions around the world through expropriation, pollution, and psychological despair and this is literally indisputable

>>132993828
Ok they were "unable" to or were too "lazy" to do so. Can you give me a single example of a single person who has gone from mining iron to creating a consumer good and then selling it on the market?

Your entire argument is based on an idiotic hypothetical that has no bearing on the real world and your need to bring the argument to such a level of abstraction speaks volumes about how much your ideology applies to the conditions we actually face

>>132988876
>Explain to me why workers shouldn't own the places they work.

I never understood what the fuck commies are talking about with this.
Worker cooperatives are not necessarily incompatible with capitalism. They exist in the US and it's a legitimate form of business. Go start a business with your friends and share work/profit/ownership.

>>132994014
>a jew defending usury

WHO'D'VE THOUGHT

>>132993279
Because he's more valuable than you in the eyes of the person that owns the business. Want to seize the means of production? go take the financial risk and purchase your own business. It's not your manager at McDonald's fault that the owner of the store sees him as more valuable to his company than you. Maybe get more skills and become more marketable if it bothers you so much you fucking loser pile of shit

>>132994104

>shitskin immigrants who work for nothing aren't let in by capitalists

Really? Who are the most prominent supporters of visa programs and mass immigration?

Apple, facebook, google, Microsoft, etc. etc.

File: Venus surface.jpg (112KB, 998x499px) Image search: [Google]

112KB, 998x499px

>>132993905

>>132988876
Why should the legion obey caesar when hes only one man?

>>132993837
But why does a company have the rights to natural resources just because they were able to monopolize the force (at the expense of others) necessary to enforce that claim?

If you look at the historical development of resource extraction industries, there's basically no justification for why these corporations should "own" what is found in the ground other than they had enough guns and enough government support to make it there's

>>132993810
All I see is them and I shilling for Laissez-faire Capitalism. Which is a far from the status quo as you can get.

>>132994014
indeed

in other words, there is a price tag on job safety and guaranteed wages. Or else the workers can try to sell their shit themselves. At which point they would quickly arrive at a similar mode of organization that already existed

>>132994053
>Most of the people who created and handled their own businesses didn't create the business
>nepotism
Aawwww, hating on people who inherited their daddy's business, I sense a lot of high quality salt in that mine. I'll come seize it and make some profit.

File: 2d8c9cec246e0c43e93604736eae9e6a.jpg (13KB, 236x228px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 236x228px

>>132994104

>>132994026
>the reason workers even exist is because we do not have the machinery currently to replace people in every single job

So then aren't workers by definition more irreplaceable than "creators"?

>>132994441
Yeah. We get to the root of communist mentality when you peel back the layers. It's usually insane jealousy. It's not Rich Chads fault his parents worked harder than yours.

>>132993392
Yes, it was the same during the communism here. Some communist swine was put in charge of things, because the suburban and rural retards were just doing the communism wrong, and because as is usual with communist swines, he was completely clueless about everything, everyone under him were just constantly lying and making up the amount of produce.
So when you were ordered to produce 20 chickens, because you didn't give a shit you produced 12, wrote down 22, guy who were supposed to supervise didn't give a shit, wrote down 25, and so it went all the way to the top where the oblivious communist swine never found out, because it was ignorant of everything that went on.
Some work still got done because people naturally wanted to be productive, but I swear to god, if usual party worked for two hours a day, it was already too much.

>>132994407
>Laissez-faire Capitalism
>as far from the status quo as you can get.

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHHAHA *breathes* AHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAAAAA

File: 1499384572740.jpg (64KB, 640x924px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 640x924px

>>132988876
Why they shouldn't? Start your own business with a bunch of other workers, purchase everything yourself and own the business collectively.

If you just work for somebody, you don't own shit.

Commies seem very butthurt for being losers. Whats interesting is when a WASP commie speaks, its like extreme self loathing meets whiney 3 uear old who wants the class to share with it.

>>132994320
that's cute, a priority state-owned sector makes a space can that can withstand a beating for a while
exactly how did this glorious achievement aid any comrade not directly involved in the project, none of whom owned the means of space can production?

>>132994679
Well wouldn't losers in theory be the most butthurt?

File: commies4.jpg (112KB, 812x531px) Image search: [Google]

112KB, 812x531px

>>132994582
Yep. You can just look at OP and my question that was never answered. They don't care about communism or marxism or whatever. They believe in property just as much as any of us. They want to OWN something others tried to make (or their grandpa, it doesn't even matter).

It's textbook theft.

>>132994622
Are you retarded? Every year government spendings and intervention breaks historical records, every yeah we spend more on welfare, every year more regulations. Yes, shilling Laissez-faire Capitalism is as far from the status quo as you can get.

>>132994668
Because it would be a cluster fuck. It sounds great but you get 5 people buying in and working a small business it'd be chaos

>>132994481
Let us look at an example. Craftsmen. Has great product, lifetime guarantee. Fires lot of long term workers and moves overseas for cheaper labor and higher profits. Now shitty product, no guarantee. Losses money yearly. Sells out to another company. Ceos still retire with millions. Workers are only loss.

Why not push for heavy fine legislation to compensate previous work forces on this instead of just bitching?

>>132994986
Yeah I mean I agree with you but the question the Aussie shitposter was posing was a theoretical one of "irreplacibility"

>>132988876


risk.

you may have capital and invested a billion dollars in your business, but if you make mistakes or your product is shit, it can be gone in a day

>>132994911

we believe in personal property but not in private property.

>>132989665
>unfair at an industrial level

if you pay a burger flipper more than he's worth, anyone actually worth that is now worth the same amount of money as a burger flipper.

if you want your employees to be paid more, cut jobs and make them work harder.

>>132988876
>Explain to me why workers shouldn't own the places they work.
What if they can't fucking afford to build it? Then what?

>>132994986
>Why not push for heavy fine legislation to compensate previous work forces
with what justification?
they're out now, recieved a salary for the time that they worked there, and that's it

and what happens with a company after a worker is out has nothing to do with him anymore

>>132988876
With the market system it's simply inefficent because you'd have to keep everyone employed and still compete with companies that have externalized manufacturing to developing nations.

Meaning you'd lilely be unable to provide living wages for employees.

>>132994952
I know anon. I'm just feeding the obvious troll. There is even a research on collective ownership and how it hurts investments and stuff, nut I can't find it.

>>132992246
thiskillsthecommie.jpg

>>132994288
>Apple, facebook, google, Microsoft, etc. etc.

Under what pretense are they supporting migrants, visas, women in workplace etc.etc.
That is right - yours you progressive swine. All of the diversity, all of the social justice, all that crap about open world, equality and we are all human.
When we say that you are the biggest corporatist shills for, we are not kidding

>>132988876

Because the guy assembling the do-dad isn't as smart as the guy who got the capital and hired the worker to build the do-dad. So communism always fails because it promotes the least capable, at least in theory. In reality it's just a pre-tense for tyrants to rule people based on bullshit.

>>132995314
>implying any Communist supports those "progressive" corporations

>implying any corporation can be progressive

File: 817bca0ef5c1b33c3bc938da47cf275fd3ab4c17ef451e68e27193b83bf6dab1.png (524KB, 600x1373px) Image search: [Google]

524KB, 600x1373px

>>132995242

>>132994761
Whatever happened to if you cant beat em, join em?

I just think its hilarious when a wasp speaks favorably of communism. "I am willing to give away my livelihood for a more equitable society because i am priveledged"... you dont realize that you will be killed or bred asap?

>company exists because of one man's brilliance
>now partly owned by a bunch of retarded niggers that can only stack boxes in the brilliant man's warehouse


Wonderful idea Marx had, yep.

What a fucking idiot.

File: what.jpg (10KB, 128x128px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 128x128px

>>132992539

>This faggot honestly believes this

>>132994320
Socialism? Really pal? Because the last time I heard you screeching excuses like stabbed swine, you were waffling something about state capitalism.

>>132988876
They can.

>>132995165
I ment to add investors. They lost out the most. But the work force was promised retirement and other benefits and did not recieve dues. Like Oscar Myer workers before Kraft bought it out.

>>132995435
hard to "join 'em" in an economy that produces basically no good jobs any more

>>132988876

the problem with you people is that you always want other people to do this stuff, its never you

you are not interested in starting a new business and turning into what you preach. you know the law actually provides for this, right? there is literally nothing stopping you from forming a corporation or a partnership and giving ownership to the workers.

thats not what you want though. what you want is for the state (i.e. career politicians and bureaucrats, part of the bourgeoisie) to control the ownership of businesses. your hope is that this will result in them distributing part of this wealth to you. this obviously won't happen, as demonstrated by every communist paradise in history, as the political caste are not soviet ubermensch but weak-willed cowards like you who will squander most of the wealth and take the remaining bit for yourself.

you might realize the above is true by reflecting on the fact that, even though current laws allow perfectly well for the type of business ownership you propose, you don't want any other kind of business ownership to be allowed. you dont really want the workers to control the ownership, because the workers might then start doing capitalist things (gasp) like investing their profits, growing their share, hiring new people for a fixed fee, etc.

tl;dr you need to be more precize. your op should have read:

>Explain to me why the state, as run by career politicians and bureaucrats, shouldn't own the places we work

Something between capitalism and socialism is great.

>>132995480
>I'm an ignorant child who hasn't studied Russian history

Stalin was no bastion of morality but he pulled off an economic miracle

>>132995480
>>This faggot honestly believes this

what's not true about it?

>>132995135
I know this one, comrade. Private property is what communist swine wants, personal property is what communist swine already has.
See? I'm learning.

File: 1497369831326.png (710KB, 720x748px) Image search: [Google]

710KB, 720x748px

>>132995430
then why can't any of those workers build their own tools and factories for their own business?
oh that's right, because those who can't will post stupid pictures saying he need to be shot because he achieved something you lazy asses refuse to even attempt.
It's a good thing we will never find out , your side is too weak and busy crying over 2 scoops of 100 gender flavors

>>132994216
>risk-bearing capital investment is now usury

wew lad

>>132995728
>miracle
violence is wonderful
I wonder why it isn't used as a motivation tool nowadays

File: Manifesto.png (43KB, 628x129px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 628x129px

>>132995773
Pre-fucking-cisely. And we're damn proud of it

>>132995389
And yet, somehow, they agree with them 100% when it comes to social engineering. Almost as if they're both following the same dead german kike.

>>132995912
Actually it's the main motivation tool of capitalist nowadays. What do you think the threat of destitution/starvation is for a worker who steps out of line?

>>132995135
none of what you are saying has any relevant meaning/makes any sense

you cant just invent some arbitrarily divided category and then go => QED

>>132988876
>Explain to me why workers shouldn't own the places they work.

Someone paid to make that place happen, so you know, his property so he can start a business and offer jobs. The one maing this place w orked before to afford it. Taking the enterprise from the owner is theft, always


>Why should someone own a business simply because they hold capital?

>Why should someone own a business simply because they hold capital?

Because they have the capital and they can


Get a work you fucking loser or start one, get a loan

File: capita.jpg (67KB, 571x290px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 571x290px

>>132988876
Marx was confused about the relationship between capital and labor

File: 1499498682330.jpg (35KB, 416x416px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 416x416px

>>132995389
This is why you are oblivious useful idiot.

>implying any Communist supports those "progressive" corporations

The day I will see a communist not dressed in clothes and with gimmicks that normal working class person could never afford, I will drop dead out of pure shock.

>>132988876
>Why should someone own a business simply because they hold capital?
Why should someone own a business simply because they work?

I you the one who has to explain why you not recognize all the savings needed to hold capital

File: 1341341355.png (23KB, 1100x258px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 1100x258px

>>132995135
>we believe in personal property but not in private property

>https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/private
intended for or restricted to the use of a particular PERSON, group, or class a private park
b : belonging to or concerning an individual PERSON

>https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/personal
of, relating to, or affecting a particular person : PRIVATE, individual

If you're missing my gist, the difference between personal and private when it comes to property is all in your head. It's a synonym. I suggest seeking help.

>>132988876
Workers don't know anything about where they work. They're literally told to show and put screws in a socket all day and leave. You want them to own capital if the company wants to fire their ass for being lazy? Get the fuck out of here, commie cum stain.

>>132994425
The risk vs security trade off is the most basic social contract for human beings. The rulers of society are those willing to take the risks inherent in challenging others and climbing the dominance hierarchy. Most of society willingly submits to the rulers to avoid those same risks, and will even support such dominance provided said rule furthers their own security. This is why the most basic duty of a ruler is to keep his people safe and well provendered. This is also why revolutions happen when the "lower classes" no longer feel their future is secure.

>>132995773
>swine swine swine swine swine swine swine swine

It seems you love word "swine".

>>132996139
It's*

>>132995694
Yup, a nationalist social democracy AKA Scandinavia in the 60's-70's was great. But there's a lot of reasons why this models doesn't work in every country.

>>132995536

?? surely not me

Look, workers are supposed to work, not manage their workplace and so they are paid to work by their superiors. If a worker doesn't like his wage he/she can either ask for a raise (reasonable, of course) or to leave the workplace and find another one with a more suitable for the worker wage.
Trust me, being a sole trader is a very inefficient and takes away any kind of freedom for personal life.

>>132996016
nope, homeless shelters capacities are vastly larger than any commie bread lines, e.g. venezulan retards being the latest fad in dieting

>>132995836
all usury bears risk you fuck

>>132995912
So you concede that Stalin was responsible for massive expansion of Russia's economy, you are just upset by the methods he used

File: kadakapally_0.jpg (117KB, 960x555px) Image search: [Google]

117KB, 960x555px

>>132996135
Drop dead bitch

>tfw you want to control the means of production, but rather than buying capital and starting a business where you do indeed control the means of production, you instead require the state to steal somebody else's capital for your own purpose but then you realize that you've become the fat cat factory owner you despised but now you have to increase production to meet the five year plan or you get gulaged so you treat your workers worse than the fat cat ever did but it's okay because it's better to rule in hell than serve in heaven

>>132988876
Same reason soldiers can't command units they are a part of. They cannot hold to a singular vision towards an objective. Everything would become a committee and committees suck balls at actually doing work.

Therefore business fails. Therefore, communism can never work.

>>132995572
>But the work force was promised retirement and other benefits and did not recieve dues
and can you not say that after every bad decision?
Making mistakes is part of the trade. If the money is gone, it's gone, nobody can be obliged to compensate

If I am leader of a company and I make one mistake and things go bad and everybody still wants their money and I am a debt slave for the rest of my life, why would I ever want to lead a company?

the problem is with the retirement money for the most part. Save it up yourself, and get it up front every month. Better system. Of course nobody does it like this around these parts because giving the money later opens up possibilities to scam people

>>132996282
nope, I believe the main driver were the people rebuilding from their bloodbath
having a madman at the helm has little to do with repurposing of expropriated property and imported technologies

I'm curious how old are you if you don't mind sharing?

>>132989204
commie btfo

File: 1494988807943.png (235KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

235KB, 500x500px

>>132989459
>>132989204

>mfw the free market allows socialism

I never thought about this but that is fun.

(well, at least until it becomes crony capitalist monopolistic/olygopolistic corrupt and eats all the small or medium sized business establishing massive uncontrollable corporate power.)

What is the free market's solution to this natural problem?

>>132996352
commieball this

>>132995920
And yet again you post another evidence that you are not working class. never change, communist swine, one day we will drag you out of your expensive college classes and out of your huge houses.

>>132988876
>Explain to me why workers shouldn't own the places they work.
Sure, when they fucking founded the company

>>132996513
Lmao try it. Your cucked neoliberal state will prevent you from committing all of the violent delusions in your head.

File: 1485551067393.png (159KB, 480x573px) Image search: [Google]

159KB, 480x573px

>>132995827

they haven't inherent shitton of money like the capitalists?

and why do you think capitalist liberals are communists?

>>132996513
Also, is posting from the Manifesto, a document written precisely for working class people now evidence that I'm not working class?

Working class people read and are intelligent too asshole.

>>132996450
Funny how the peasants of Russia were unable to "rebuild from their bloodbath" under the capitalist Czars, under the oversight of those hardworking nobles who earned all their capital, but saw massive growth and increase in living standards under madman Stalin

>>132994207
>Your entire argument is based on an idiotic hypothetical that has no bearing on the real world and your need to bring the argument to such a level of abstraction speaks volumes about how much your ideology applies to the conditions we actually face
I wasn't even the one who started the oven argument, but I'll gladly entertain.

>Can you give me a single example of a single person who has gone from *extracting natural resources* to creating a consumer good and then selling it on the market?

Saudi Arabian oil was first discovered by the Americans in commercial quantities at Dammam oil well No. 7 in 1938.

File: Dead rich cunt.jpg (28KB, 450x297px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 450x297px

>>132996330
What does rich americunt swine have to do with them?

>>132996758
age?

>>132996140

for a marxist private property is equal to the means of production.

>>132996740
>business spontaneously generate out of thin air with no input from the people who end up running them
sounds like capitalism is unstoppable then

>>132996797
"single person" retardo, not a corporation

Also, all Saudi oil is now owned by the state through AramCo, which is how it should be

>>132996798
Ah so they're not communists now?

>>132996824
So you can't confront my arguments, only desperately search for ammunition to use in an ad-hom.

>>132996833
And for a paranoid schizophrenic, the people around him are aliens from Mars who try to eat him.

It's ok, I respect everyone's opinion. It's not like it affects me. Keep thinking blue is red, oranges are apples, it's fine!

>>132988876
as long as they don't acquire it without forcing anyone into anything, nope, workers shouldn't own their workplace, you dumb looting nigger

>>132996744
>Working class people read and are intelligent too

They are. And that is why they are not communist swines. You would know that, if you ever worked with any of them, but you don't.
In decades of working in heavy industry, across more than twenty companies, I have worked with people of all creed, races and class. With good people, with criminals, with drug addicts.
With shitload of nazis. Never in my life I encountered a communist. I want to say that I wonder why, but we both know the answer.

>>132996500
>free market allows socialism
Switzerland has the most economic freedom of any European country and democracy is well ingrained in its culture. The development of such cooperatives was organic to them, but there's reason to believe that the freer the economy more such coops or mutuals would develop elsewhere too.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Migros
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coop_(Switzerland)

>>132996998
>Refusing to answer a simple question
>Assuming this hard
No one needs to confront your arguments when you defeat yourself with posts like that. Just sad.

>>132996998
nothing malicious about it, I only wonder how young someone could be so that he actually speaks in favor of such a retarded and failed totalitarian dystopia

>>132997192
Seems odd then than Communist governments win elections in Kerala and Nepal and that 40% of CIO affiliated Unions were Communist organized

>>132988876
>Explain to me why workers shouldn't own the places they work.

They're too stupid. If everyone in a firm is educated and intelligent, cooperative ownership and democratic control of capital is the way to go. McDicks workers have no business owning anything, because they'll just bankrupt it.

>>132996998
What does a state capitalist Russia under Stalin have to do with communism?

>>132997059

Personal property includes "items intended for personal use" (e.g., clothes, homes, and vehicles, and sometimes money). It must be gained in a socially fair manner, and the owner has a distributive right to exclude others.

Private property is a social relationship between the owner and persons deprived (not a relationship between person and thing), e.g., artifacts, factories, mines, dams, infrastructure, natural vegetation, mountains, deserts, seas, etc.

File: 74b.jpg (40KB, 600x693px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 600x693px

>>132988876

you HAVE NO ARGUMENT JAGO FF YOU FUCKHEAD THEORISTS WHO NEVER HAD A JOB HAVE RUN THINGS INTO THE GROUND FOR EIGHT GODDAMN YEARS ASSHOLES GO FUCK PAUL KRUGMAN YOU BOLSHEVIK CUNT,,ever had a real jobbbbbbb??????? A JAY OH BEEEE EVER HAD ONE??? EVER??? eggheads' first and last resort when they have no answer zero argument,grammar they are idiots you are an idiot jagoffs ya lost capitalism got embraced stalinism tossed off the bridge,,lithuania estonia east germany, bulgaria,latvia,the 100 CCCPs,england said fuck you EU. trump won you lost cuck ya losers get a job

>>132997406
>They're too stupid
YesBUUUUUUUUUT they are the ones producing the burgers, along with the factory workers and the truckers who move them.
Checkmate capitalist scum.

>>132997474
Like I said I respect your custom definition. For me, however, private property is being married and I don't believe in it, so I think it's time I come bang your wife with the rest of the buddies who agree with my definition.
Nothing personell, m80.

>>132997451
Did the capitalist class decide where the fruits of social production went?

If not, then it's not "state capitalist "

>>132996740
>they haven't inherent shitton of money like the capitalists?
Workers can found a company, they just would have to start from scratch, they are not entitled to capital money, they have to work their asses to get it.

>>132997566
>Chickens should own the farm because they're the ones who make the eggs. Who cares if they have less intelligence than a dog? They should vote on decisions.

>>132997781
>Implying there aren't actually people who unironically believe that
Ask a vegan to educate you :DDD

>>132997781
>Comparing human workers to farm animals

Jesus Christ

File: ultranigger.jpg (100KB, 641x486px) Image search: [Google]

100KB, 641x486px

>>132997933

>>132997474
>It must be gained in a socially fair manner

Remember that this is the excuse the Organs will use to send you to the gulag when they like the look of your watch. That or some vague "anti-revolutionary activity" charge.

>>132998017
>implying I wouldn't happily go to the gulag for Daddy Stalin

You underestimate my masochism

>>132997933
You consider animals inferior to humans? Fucking hypocrite commie, disrespecting other cults.

>Can't get shit for free
Why is this simple concept so hard to understand for commies? is it because they're delusional?

>>132997059
To be fair, your argument doesn't really makes sense. They make a clear distinction between private and personal property, thus generating terms. This is how every academic process work. Every theory has its terminology.

I'm by no means a communist, and doesn't support collectivizing neither private nor personal property, to use marxist terminology But saying that the terms they use doesn't mean what they say because of the dictionary isn't an argument. There are many, legitimate ways to critique and disprove Communism, but that isn't one.

>>132988876
Because labourers are rarely smart enough to run a successful factory.

>>132990089
I'll try and make this simpler.
IT. IS. BECAUSE. THE. OWNER. SPENT. THE. MONEY. TO. BUY. RAW. MATERIALS. AND. TO. HAVE. THOSE. MATERIALS. TURNED. INTO. A. PRODUCT.
>TL;DR:You don't waste resources with out a return

>>132995836
all usury bears risk you fuck

its this type of economic/legal illiteracy that makes it so no-one takes you lot seriously.

literally everything in the world carries risk. you (likely an amerifat antifa) could choke on your burger tonight. its not that likely though.

most loans are not actually risk-bearing in the way that capital is. you know how banks will only loan to business if they offer collateral? you know how, when a business defaults, the bank will take all of the shit they offered as a guarantee (inventory, real estate, w/ever) to cover the outstanding amount? you won't always get 100%, but when you scale it up most banks do a pretty decent job of recovering their loans. the interest accounts for the rest of the credit risk+profit).

capital investment is different. its not possible to put money into capital with a guaruantee or colleteral to back it up. you are putting your money in and hoping that the company makes is profitable. if the company goes belly up, you are last in line to recover your investment. if the company has more outstanding obligations than assets, you get nothing at all (unlike the bank who loaned money to the company).

the upside is that the lender only gets the loan amount + a small fee, whereas the capital investor has a right to the profits as well, and thus can more easily double or triple his investment. the downside is that he can also lose it all more easily.

thinking that capital investment has anything to do with usury or lending is beyond retarded

>>132988876
If you go to the Casino, do you think the workers there should get your winnings instead of you?

>>132997392
>China isn't artificially proping up maoist movements

Key learn at least some geopolitics before posting here newfriend

>>132997228

the modern coop, as seen in many countries (belgium and netherlands for example) is actually a british invention from circa the industrial revolution

>>132997718
Oh, let me just browse the archive for a bit, I have heard one of you cocksucker making excuses for why Russia wasn't real communism:

>Did the working class owned the means of production in Soviet Russia. No, because Soviet Russia was state capitalist country

Which one is it, communist swine? Shouldn't you get together and democratically vote which deflections are you going to use? Or just ask your rich college professor, if you are not sure.

>>132998509
Implying the CPI(M) is Maoist. They're explicitly anti-Maoist retard.

Also in Nepal the Maoists lost to MLs

>>132998360

meant to quote this gommie

>>132996282

>>132998689
Revisionists deserve the gulag too. The USSR was a socialist state

>>132997933
Now that is cute coming from a communist swine. How do you call people in your little circlejerks? That is right - the 'bodies'.

>>132997953
>communist swine thinks he owns his wife

Nice social justice you got there.

>>132994360
They don't have the right because there is no law to enforce such a thing. But you also don't have the right.

So since nobody has a right nobody should be able to mine it?

If you chop down a tree and make wooden planks are they your wooden planks? I would argue yes, but if you don't believe in personal property than that is our issue I guess.

>>132988876
explain to me why kill the owner and confiscate it ?
>no answer ?
drown in your own pool of capital.

>>132998878
>The USSR was a socialist state

Did workers in USSR own the means of production?

>>132998652
>modern coop, as seen in many countries
Yes, I'm not saying they don't exist elsewhere, but they aren't as prevalent as in Switzerland.

>british invention from circa the industrial revolution
And it just so happens that those were the times where laissez-faire capitalist ideas were very popular in Britain. Ideas that got abandoned since.
>Great Britain in the nineteenth century was a great bastion of individualism where that merciless principle of the political economists - laissez faire - dominated public opinion, and Parliament, under its sway, vanquished the last vestiges of an overweaning, Mercantilist state.

>>132998229
Obviously my argument doesn't make sense because it's making fun of their argument, which doesn't make sense.

>This is how every academic process work. Every theory has its terminology.
Their theory has terminology that almost arbitrarily denies or changes commonly accepted word definitions. If we all did that, there would be chaos. Oh, this word FOR ME means that. But for you it means something else. Look, I understand most people feel kinda bad in 2017, they 'need' to do their own rebellion and question everything and have 'opinions' even when it comes to math, but this is a little retarded. Unless of course you believe that calling oranges apples is legit. Then my argument DOES make sense.
>The paradox of your comment.

>>132999355
Yes through the apparatus of the Party

>>132988876
>>132989459
Because they're fucking useless losers with no ambition that's why. There's nothing stopping any group of say a dozen people from pooling resources and investing in a business plan. Nothin except their lack of talent and ambition that is. So the solution for them is simply to entitle themselves to the property of others and the fruits of their talent and ambition. OP and his ilk are the worst pox on mankind and need to be physically removed from society.

>>132999999

File: trash with redistributed face.jpg (303KB, 1600x1002px) Image search: [Google]

303KB, 1600x1002px

>>132999655
Ahahahahahahaha, holy shit, get a load of this fucking faggot. No fucking wonder that the communist swines always butcher so many of the working class.
You do nothing but twist the meaning, all the time in everything, and then back pedal when everything goes to shit, hidden in your mansions.

>>132993042
>all the dozens of times that happened wasn't real communism!

File: w5LyeU1.png (27KB, 2000x1333px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 2000x1333px

>tfw the greatest adversaries to your ideology tend to worship a communist, primitivist, environmentalist, anti-war, pacifistic hippie
>tfw they claim that their god is in compliance with their ideological perspective

>>132993837
>In reality, monopolies do tend to form, therefore we need regulation

The regulation is exactly what causes the monopoly dummy, they're always written by the companies getting regulated to favor them and shut everyone else down

File: 6.jpg (61KB, 568x544px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 568x544px

>>132988876
>Explain to me why workers shouldn't own the places they work.
Because they didn't create them? And if they did they probably do own them. Weird question.

>>133000602
>tfw a communist thinks he can handle faith , when he doesn't know the slightest about it

>>132988876
One of the jobs I worked at was employee owned, everyone who works there for 3 years or more gets a stock option and starts getting paid shares of the company in addition to their salary, and when they quit/retire the company buys out their shares, the smallest amount I saw being $10,000, another guy who worked there for 15 years made over a million on his company shares.

>>132988876
why would anyone take the risk otherwise?

>>132997474
how does a totalitarian expropriate crypto?

>>133000602

>commie retards think only christcucks can be capitalists

Go make me some more money, goy

>>132988876
Every coop I've encountered is corrupt, highly priced, and would never survive on the free market.

File: marx.jpg (159KB, 500x712px) Image search: [Google]

159KB, 500x712px

>>133000602
Jesus is not a communist at all. Only in your pathetically facile Reddit understanding of scripture.

>>132995678
This, good point dutchbro.

>>133001525
secretly snatches it for his nation

>>132996500
I want to know this as well.

I don't mind free markets but I have a problem with extreme concentrations of power and capital.

File: value.png (700KB, 537x1464px) Image search: [Google]

700KB, 537x1464px

>>132988876
Workers can and often do own the places they work
They quit their jobs working for capitalists and become self-employed, using their own means to create value from their labour and keeping all of it. Sometimes they do so well that they risk their personal property providing jobs and tools for others, increasing the value of their labour, agreeing a small portion of their value in return to pay for their equipment and the service of providing and managing their labour, as their employee does not want to take the risks of doing so

Sometimes the worker provides so many jobs they quit their production and make managing the labour and value of the people working at their company a full time job, agreeing to accept the risk and responsibility of doing so in exchange for a share of the labour value of everyone who works there. Those who disagree can take their labour and go to become self-employed instead.

Eventually they may wish to lend the value of their work to other workers so that they can increase the efficacy of their labour in creating value. If the workers agree to this they may promise a share of the value created by the venture to the investor for the time they've had it and as a reward for their faith, as they may fail which would pose a risk to the property of the original investor.

I understand where gommies come from but they always seem to end up with this black-and-white worldview that we have to shoot every capitalist and manager and either have every person doing everything that involves getting value from his labour entirely himself, or make a worker out of everyone and put all management in the hands of omnipotent state bureaucrats

The reality of the world is that plenty of people just want to get up, do something of their choice that isn't mind-numbing or backbreaking labour for 8 hours, get paid for their labour before it's profitable, then go home without thinking about managing their own distribution and are happy to give a cut.

>>133002172
how does comrade into private key? does revolutionary criminal spirit aid in cryptography breakage? if it did I'm sure the head chink would issue that order

>>133002332
sneaky chink overlooked shoulder and copied the key in his asian mind

File: 798.png (306KB, 593x540px) Image search: [Google]

306KB, 593x540px

>>133001678
eye of a needle, christcuck

>>133002794
how do you rationalize your idol genociding gorillions of citizens? what's stopping your utopia from pulling a cheka on you?

>>132996500
>>133002274
Keep the govt the hell out of the system. As long as coercion is not present, and we aren't talking about natural monopolies (which yea we oughta take special consideration for those) then what you bring up simply doesn't happen.

Case in point FDA charges like 200 million to get authorized to do your own testing for a drug. Only big companies can compete in that situation.

>>133002911
>how do you rationalize your idol genociding gorillions of citizens?
Wait wait wait, HOL UP.
That wasn't real communism!

>>133002911
>idol genociding gorillions of citizens

Capitalist revisionist history.

>>133003152
oh, how naive of me, of course gorillions selflessly gave their lives so a dog could be sent into space, gotcha

>>133003089
>fascist upset by state killings

kek

File: 1498594846964.jpg (29KB, 342x358px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 342x358px

>>133003246
>nazbol

File: 1495746092046.gif (1MB, 576x566px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 576x566px

>>132994320
Bump

File: 1498948241388.png (829KB, 632x543px) Image search: [Google]

829KB, 632x543px

>>133003751
>bumping after bump limit is reached

File: 1495365028066.gif (3MB, 300x236px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 300x236px

>>132994320
do you actually believe this is real? are you in high school?

>>133002794
you wouldn't fit, you're a crazy leftard

>>132992405
Nigger you didn't answer, what gives the state the right to own property but not the individual?