/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>49631187
why do americans believe anything that is remotely to the left equals communism?

>>49631227
>point specifically to commies
>shitholer still gets upset and spergs at America
shocked

>>49631187
why do you love licking your bosses boots so much? You know he's just a greedy asshole, right?

>>49631260
Why do you think I'm not self-employed?

>>49631260
One of the beauties of capitalism is you can be your own boss.

>>49631187
They believe in irrational dogma of Equality. That's why they absolutely fail to create literally anything functional, they fuck up the economy, fuck up the society, literally anything they touch goes to shit.

Just take this meme, the NPC commie tard wants all workers to get "equal" share of profits, this alone shows that commies don't have any subjective sense of how people and businesses work in real life.

>>49631300
Your customers are your boss

>>49631260
Which company/business do you own?

>>49631343
That only applies to mcwagies. Your clients are your partners. Not your boss.

>>49631343
Your customers are your lifeblood, you have no reason not to try and make them happy. But you're still your own boss

>>49631187
>complaining about people not knowing shit about economics on a Kyrgyz telemarketing Ponzi legal help forum
You're a long way from home, yuppie boy; >>>/reddit/

>>49631343
No customers are your customers. The central thing to any business is it's product or service.

>>49631395
>on a Kyrgyz telemarketing Ponzi legal help forum
>>>>/reddit/
Now That's What I Call Projection: Volume Go Back

>>49631187
doesn't it work exactly like that in worker co-ops?
socialists love those, even though they're a fascist invention

What a stupid fucking picture.

>>49631432
Commie Detected

>>49631187
Perfect encapsulation of people blaming O&G companies for "price gouging," and the exact same people laughing at them in 2020 when crude went negative and stayed super cheap for months.

>>49631187

>If a company has losses, that debt should be shared equally among all workers

That literally already happens under our current system, you retarded subhuman monkey. They're called BAILOUTS.

>wHy ARe CoMmIEs sO EcOnOmICaLly IlLiTerAte

Concentration camps are too good for you dumb subhuman fucks

>>49631436
Yeah the whole board is being raided right now, they have 3 threads running right now at least.

>>49631479
>They're called BAILOUTS.
Let's not pretend commies are capable of getting to the source of problem of (((BAILOUTS)))

>>49631511

>Posts retard subhuman image macro sarcastically stating something should happen that already provably does
>Gets proven wrong and btfo
>Immediately pivots to ((((((((DA JOOOS))))))) boogeyman, every stormfag's last resort when they have no rebuttal

You are a subhuman monkey

>>49631227
low IQ and a century of racemixing have stunted their mental capabilities such that they only understand left/right, black/white paradigms. if they weren't retarded subhuman cattle, they would recognize that we live in a socialist country -- one where the jews reap the benefits, not the citizens.

>megacorps receiving bailouts and tax cut job creator gibs
>sub-livable wages subsidized by section 8, welfare, etc.
>""""both sides"""" turning the eye to illegal immigration, outsourcing, h1b immigration, etc.
>countless middle man scam industries propped up by political bribes (car dealership model, realtors, insurance companies, wholesalers, etc.)
>life and death health insurance tied to wagie jobs
>0 worker rights aside from OSHA

>>49631573
>reddit spacing
>commie gets assmad at image making fun of its ideology
>immediately defends the people who have a stranglehold over our government and their own ethnostate
Why are commies always 100% unironic jew lovers?

>>49631227
>>49631260
>>49631395
>>49631479
>>49631578
Found the bootlickers

>>49631436
Do you understand the concept of an LLC, anon? Maybe you should stop obsessing over muh commies, because they are not a real world threat. Commies destroyed themselves after '08 with identity politics. They will never achieve any power because they will never have internal unity because of that. Capitalism has literally cucked these faggots so hard that just hanging a rainbow flag will make these cucks accept literal slave labor. They will forever remain busy fiercely debating which of the 729 genders it is acceptable or inacceptable to be if you're white while we make them live in the pod for 90% of their income and force them to chug protein shakes for the remaining 10%.
If you want to be a little whiny bitch about muh commies go to pol and stop shitting up the actual money making board. No one here cares about your gay theoretical memeonomics or your meaningless political debates in a world in which money always rules in the end nigger.

>>49631187

> ‘if we make losses’

Neglecting to mention that if you own the means of production you only produce enough to meet the needs of the company/organisation.

Shit bait OP, keep simping for noseberg and co you bootlicker

>>49631635
>Do you understand the concept of an LLC, anon?
According to commies it's an evil entity that can do nothing but exploit and purchase yachts
>go to pol
ah looks like I snared another reddit visitor

>>49631479

> citation needed

>>49631632
found the goycattle

>>49631635
Okay you communist faggot

>>49631643
>retard commie thinks a factory is a money printer that instantly sells whatever it produces
lol. lmao

>>49631687
You should deal with your fellow comrades who refuse to acknowledge the JQ

>>49631687
Nigger nigger nigger nigger

>>49631607

>subhuman mayo monkey vermin posts shitty image macro
>I blow him the fuck out
>faggot pivots to DA JOOS
>his faggot whiteboy friends come to jerk him off and lick his wounds
>white vermin deserve extinction

Why are biz faggots such subhuman roaches who deserve to be sent to extermination camps?

>>49631714
>fellow comrades
tell me you're an uneducated hourly worker without telling me you're an uneducated hourly worker.

>>49631227
marxism (and communism by extent) never claimed profits "should be earned equally among workers". not sure where you fucking retards got that idea but its not in any major commie textbook. its just a dumb idea burgers have because they are allergic to reading.

>>49631730
>>49631741
>reddit spacer defends jews and is unironic commie
happens a lot more than you'd think

>>49631743
>profits
HISS!
BOO!
EXPLOITER!

>>49631187
>What are layoffs?

>>49631227
boomers called everything like that socialist/communist and then socialists/communists here (typically kids) just kept going with that and so they think nordic countries are socialist and other retard shit

>>49631492
This happens every time Crypto goes down, all the twitter commies come here to start gloating because they hate the idea of poorer people making money out of it.

>>49631763
>lose your job
>don't get saddled with the debt of the company
You didn't make the point you thought you were making

>>49631673
I'm trying to wake you up to the reality that politics is a theatrical show for normies, pollack. You have this rageboner for muh commies while they have literally 0 power except forcing people to use pronouns. And even then slowly but surely a reaction to their woke BS is starting. Capitalism gets objectively stronger year after year. There are less and less commie states and in most countries socialist parties are quickly declining. You are literally wasting your time with debates with 0 consequences ever. The world isn't shaped by debates. It's shaped by people who have money. If you want to own the commies stop shitting up 4chan all day and start making money.

>>49631187
I've lived under communism. It is fucking shit and capitalism is much better.

With that said certain outcomes of capitalism need active management to not blow up the system socially and politically. Right now the most pressing issue globally is income inequality and financial repression of household income in favor of business in the west and in favor of the state in authoritarian regimes. That needs to change through smart policy decisions but those are probably not coming. The side that gets those right wins over the medium to long term.

>>49631786
I make money and make fun of commies that waddle on to my Business and Finance discussion board. Sorry if that makes you angery

why do /pol/cels pretend they are capitalists even though they are just as retarded as socialists?

>>49631187
I'm left and I'm gaining a lot of money shorting the market. Also I predicted Nasdaq's free fall from 15000$. Seethe harder, rightie baggie kek

>>49631828
What makes me not a capitalist?

>>49631687
it's funny how constant capitalist propaganda brainwashed our "spiritual billionaires" here into speaking directly against their own interest and in favor of the parasites who rob them blind and live off labor value they don't produce.
ironically enough most of them are not even teenagers. people live up to their twenties and late thirties thinking that they'd "make it big" with "hard work" eventually and delude themselves with motivational speeches by hereditary elites and "self-help" scammers.
none of them ever make it. the system was not intended for anyone but the (((chosen few))) to make it.

>>49631635
Basado

>>49631887
This is the quintessential commie here. A permanent wageslave who has already given up on his own life, so he endeavors to tear down anyone else who didn't give up, and the system that allows them to thrive. Is capitalism perfect? God no, central banks and their (((masters))) have been a plague on western civilization since the dawn of time. I just wish these retarded commies could physically recognize patterns

>>49631578
I understand why realtors and car dealerships are bullshit, but why are wholesalers like Costco bullshit?

OP’s comic isn’t a gotcha for commies.
Yes please, give me a stake in the company. Let me own the means of production and all the gains and losses that entails.

>>49631743
marxism explicitly claims profits are unpaid wages, stupid mutt

>>49631933
>Let me own the means of production and all the gains and losses that entails.
>give me!
>gib gib gib!
You know you can start your own business, right anon? And that will enable you to keep 100% of the profits

>>49631887
Chad
>>49631927
Future headline news

>>49631887
yeah they're fucking retards. i escaped blue collar wageslavery such that i now work from home and make good money. but i understand that i'm a lot closer to the homeless negroid begging for change than the billionaire jew with vacation homes in different countries.

it's another facet of the culture war. left/right brain cattle need to feel like they're a part of the tribe. muh left/right, muh gommies, muh free market, muh hecking based rural town, muh tradwife, etc. sad!

>>49631376
You never owned a business or are coping

>>49631932
i'm talking about pharma and medical device wholesalers. ever hear of companies like mckesson, cardinal, amerisourcebergen? no? they're some of the largest companies on the US stock market (all are fortune 50 i believe) and they make absurd amounts of money by skimming profits as wholesalers/distributors.
>muh value add

>>49631994
>>49631961
>blue collar fencesitter wagie retard doesn't understand the benefits of a distribution network
Not shocked

>>49632017
i work in corporate accounting/finance at a fortune 10 insurance company, retard.

>>49631607
marx was jewish, ussr was founded by jews, and jews are just highly overrepresented in commie socialist shit through history so it is no wonder they worship them

>>49631187
internet politics are one of the gayest things on earth but being given the option to have a stake in a private company is incredibly valuable a lot of the time as an employee, even though there are obviously risks involved. people here wouldn't know that of course cos they're all NEETs

>>49631227
I have never met a leftist who also wasn't a communist/marxist. The ideologies go hand-in-hand. Probably because communism attracts 'weak' people and leftists can't even open their own $oy bottles with their noodle arms. On the other hand, every supporter of capitalism that I've met has been a gym bro or high IQ faggot with a big ego due to their success. Funny how that works.

>>49631887
lol keep disregarding the fact that our parasite overlords rob us blind not by stealing our labour value through employment, but by using fiat money they have monopoly issuing and stealing our purchasing power through the debasement of the currency

>>49632049
Yes I know you're a wagie wagie that's why I said it. Just because you wage in the industry you're railing against doesn't mean your opinion that distribution/wholesale doesn't add value isn't retarded

>he still believes trickle down piss humans=rational robots 'theory'

>>49632093
>alright class now we're going to read about Henry Ford
>he made the assemblyline and the car, next page nothing else!

>>49631187
people are angry about pic related bc layoffs and such are already being applied to the working class while none of the profits are shared. if the situation was that workers shared in both cases that would already be a fairer situation. reality right now is literally the opposite of the pic and anyone trying to point out the ridiculousness of it is branded as delusional. Why would you be against a democratic workplace in the first place? the exploitation of the working class is all about people not receiving their fair share of value added to the economy and the only reason to be against it is because you dont care about taking food out of others' mouths. in a free and fair society you should receive a fair share of the rewards that you work for.

>>49632095
>brainless and transparent hand-waving argument that blindly appeals to his immutable and preconceived belief in big business jew worship
let me guess, you're a tradcath mulattoe zoomer who frequents /pol/?

>>49632134
A layoff is not being saddled with company debt

>>49632147
>distribution/wholesalers are bad because... because they take profits too!

>>49632073
>The ideologies go hand-in-hand.
The problem goes deeper, christianity is spiritual communism or vica versa, communism is the same Christian slave religion, only without God.
>On the other hand, every supporter of capitalism that I've met has been a gym bro or high IQ faggot with a big ego due to their success.
physically weak faggots naturally subscribe to leftist ideologies, while strong men are ok not depending on daddy government, who would've thought

>>49632174
>low IQ meme response
how old are you? what do you do for a living?

>>49631730

>>49632134
So you're advocating for workers to lose all their property too when they are laid off?

If socialists want to own the means of production why don't they just buy stock?

>>49632291
42, President of the Association of Global Wholesalers and Distributors

>>49632158
theyre not directly debtors but they pay for it in loss of income and existential insecurity.
if a situation arises wherein the company cannot service its debts and is running a deficit for whatever reason, the most common solution is to fire employees to reduce production costs. The company fixes its balance sheet and the worker who has nothing to do with planning the finances of the company is fucked and has to deal with the company's failings. see coinbase right now

>>49631187
It depends on who is privileged, the logic of productive humanity, or the logic of capital-itself? By the logic of capital-itself your pic would be hyprocrisy, but why would a human privilege capital-itself over the productive class of humanity? Is an economy for human ends or the ends of capital-itself?

>>49631479
>All of society are the workers in one company
Only in commie gulag state.
Please climb aboard the helicopter.

>>49631927
Jews do control many big banks and organizations, that is true so far. the problem with your theory, and where it fails, is in believing they are intentionally trying to destroy "the white race". You cannot prove such a thing and all you can muster are some out of context weak quotes for it.

This faulty type of reasoning is the same radical feminist use (since most position of power are held by powerfull men, all men are plotting to keep women down, aka: the patriarchy), and other conspiranoic groups. one thing is finding an overepresentation of one group among the elite and the other one is proving they are plotting something in tandem.

>>49632369
i can tell you're young and poor. now answer my question.

>>49632412
I can tell you're a retarded permawageslave. Now file those reports for your boss

>>49632394
>commie helicopter meme
boomer and jewish executives have been doing this to the middle class for the past 4 decades.

>>49632384
Right, that's the benefit of being an employee. At most you can lose is your income stream. If you own a company that is 100k in debt you can't lay yourself off from the debt.

>>49632073
really? not a single one? almost half of americans can be labeled as "liberals", (ie center or progressive left), openly in favor of free markets (with certain state interventions, but nothing to the point of a central economy or a fully coop economy). Actual leftists that want a revolution to redistribute the means of productions, believe in historical materialism or the such are on the far extremes.

>>49632421
i'm "working" right now. isn't it about time for your 10 hour shift at the amazon distribution center?
>I-I'M GONNA MAKE IT IN THE NEXT BULLRUN!!!! S-SEETHE!!!!!!

>>49632401
>is in believing they are intentionally trying to destroy "the white race"
>You cannot prove such a thing and all you can muster are some out of context weak quotes for it
That's not true at all, but you've already disregarded the entire pattern as 'out of context quotes' so you don't need to acknowledge the realities

>>49632323
im saying paying people their fair share of profits would give people the financial buffer to weather periods of low/no income when they happen instead of paying the minimum legally possible, keeping them poor and needy throughout their employment and then cutting them off when times are bad. in many cases people have to take on loans that worsen their situation even more.

>>49632336
why extract value from a worker just to let them buy it back later? why not just give them the fair share of the value they create in the first place?

>>49632457
In actuality the owner of a failed enterprise can just declare bankrupcy, not pay the creditors, and resume business under a different company identity. Happens every day, bankrupcy law and limited liability companies were established to enable this.

>>49632484
But seriously, I can't imagine how retarded you would need to be to grow up in the Age of Computers and not learn how to use a Shift key

>>49632548
By that same token the employee can live off credit cards and not pay them back, so their one downside of losing an income stream is completely mitigated

>>49632475
>falling for political labels
the landmark achievement of american leftism over the past few decades was electing a negroe to the highest political office. in effect he was nothing but a black george w bush with middle eastern wars and mandating that citizens purchase insurance from private corporations. stop falling for culture war retardation.

>>49632526
because a mere pattern wont give you shit. Its like thinking "old people" are plotting against young people because most positions of power are held by old farts. You need far more to prove intentionality otherwise its just schizo pattern recognition.

>>49632158
The company just declares bankrupcy to evade debt or creditors when an enterprise fails. The company is by nature limited liability, they bear no responsibility for any debts of a failed company.

>>49632446
Not a rebuttal.
This is the problem with commie thought. It's only logical within your fake commie headcannon, which never exists because it immediately degrades into the gulag-state. It can only appeal to losers looking for any excuse to gain power, however irrational.

You fags refuse to listen to anything other than your own pre existing cognitive biases about what communists believe though. It's a self fulfilling prophecy. Only fags like Richard wolf disingenuously believe co-operatives are communist. Even so, co-ops are logically better than private institutions and debt would of course be shared amongst the workers of a co-op because that's how market economies function you bottomless pit.

>>49632631
what about the USSR after stalin, you know, when the gulags were gone?

>>49632605
Regardless, your attempt to discard the entire evidence of conspiracy against the white races by jews is in vain.
>>49632610
But the name behind the LLC is still tarnished.

>>49632573
Different in nature because a company is a mask that an equity owner can discard and recreate at will, the bankrupcy of a failed company affects only the discarded persona, whilst the bankrupcy of an actual person stays with the person and his actual personhood can not be discarded and recreated at will.

>>49632475
That's the thing, most centrists don't label themselves as leftists and most even distance themselves from the title of liberal due to recent woke cringe. In the real world it's becoming uncool to be overly woke. All the self-proclaimed leftists I've met have been during my early college days. They all babbled about how communism would make life better for everyone but they never take into account human greed.

>>49632631
>the deranged qboomer who goes off on nonsensical and unmedicated tangents when presented with a short and to the point argument
yes, yes, gommies and gulags and people who fail to achieve and other worn out 1980s stereotypes of life in communist countries. take your meds and step back to reality, please.

>>49632457
losing your income while living paycheck to paycheck costs your more than just the money you dont receive anymore together with a litany of mental and physical health problems. Also if my company fails because of my mismanagement, so be it. If I lose my means to live because some silicon valley cunt (who never has to worry about working in the first place) mismananges his company while giving himself millions of dollars in bonuses, then that is fucked up.

>>49631887
When are you fags going to drop the (((red herring))) and accept materialist dialectics?

>>49632735
>while living paycheck to paycheck
> Also if my company fails because of my mismanagement
If you're living paycheck to paycheck your finances have failed because of your mismanagement and that has nothing to do with your employer who you agreed to work for at a certain pay rate.

>>49632683
Hardly, in the real world companies fail all the time and the holders continue in their other businesses or recreate new companies to continue the enterprise through a restructure or a new company that discharges the debt through bankrupcy law or phoenixing a business under a new corporate identity unrelated to the failed one. A real person can not discard their personhood.

>>49632692
The CEO and his track record is still known and factors in to future LLCs

>>49632683
it's completely expectable that jews will be among the people who tend to be billionaires. Wealth and IQ and strongly related, and jews (imo for cultural reasons) have a higher IQ than whites.

>>49632706
Still not an argument. Hold to the point, commie. No one is falling for your name calling.

>>49632802
A CEO is a real person as well and their track record goes with them. We know bankruptcy exists and it benefits employee and businesses. People use those laws to varying degrees. We're going in circles.

>>49632775
Or its a failure of the socio-political structure that can be corrected by the working poor restructuting the socio-political structure they live and work in.

>>49632814
Similarly for cultural reasons, Nepotism plays a massive role as well

>>49632878
I agree our currency has been debased to all shit, but the reality is (as proven by lottery winners going bankrupt) that most people are poor because of a lifetime of bad decisions. Bad decisions supported by terrible education supported by socio-political environment, but the internet exists so at some point it becomes their fault.

>>49632243
>banana atheist being a completely illiterate fag
>ITT
What a shock. 100% you are a squintaboo too.

>>49632814
>looking at it from the lens of personal, standalone achievement or coping it away with "it's just the way it is" i.e. genetics

they succeed because they value community and family. while your boomer/gen x parents were tricking you into thinking that neglecting college prep classes to work at mcdonalds for $7.50/hour was good (because it INSTILLED RESPONSIBILITY or some nonsense), jewish parents were pushing their children to succeed in school and introducing them to rich and powerful friends and family. when you were kicked out of the house at 18, and you thought it was a good thing because REAL MEN pay a landlord $1200 a month, the jewish kid was living at home and saving money.

>>49632775
most people in usa are living paycheck to paycheck because most jobs do not offer more, not because they want to have a low paying job. Companies in general underpaying their employees is not in my control as an employee as I need to work somewhere in order to not die. There is no free choice when signing a job contract. This could be mitigated by unions but those are basically nonexistent in usa.

>>49632812
Not in the real world. All would have paid thenselves golden handshakes and protected themselves with advanced knowledge of the enterpises failings, and as long as they haven't traded while insolvent and complied with bankrupcy laws (written in their favour) go on to the next company. Failure and bankrupcy are normal in business, laws and practice are historically structured to enable and protect it as a way to exit and wind up non-profitable businesses and move on to the next company identity unburdened by bad or unservicable debts.

>>49631479
And thats why are not a capitalist country. Those companies would be allowed to fail.

>>49632475
Another irrelevant imageboard leftist trying to separate himself from the anti-white idpol leftists who actually did seize the means of production. Many such cases.

>>49632880
Well, nepotism might play a role but I do think the jew education is highly centered on the "academic" aspect. Even little jews are expected to read the torah or whatever in hebrew just to become adults, so since they are young they are pushed to follow intellectual goals.

>>49632916
he's not talking about currency. He's saying maybe the average workers conditions would be better if workplaces were structured democratically.

>>49631187
>Why are commies so economically illiterate?
>>>/pol/

>>49632836
you're incapable of forming an independent thought. everything that comes out of your mouth is a talking point that was fed to you. supporting your arguments with nonsensical tropes is proof of this. in effect you are no different than manchildren who use analogies to superheroes or harry potter villains -- because that is your mental frame of reference.

>>49632845
Thr CEO does not bear any liability for the debts of a limited liability company. Do you not understand what a company as opposed to a sole trader or individual is?

>>49632949
>most people in usa are living paycheck to paycheck because most jobs do not offer more
False, terrible spending and saving habits
>Companies in general underpaying their employees is not in my control as an employee as I need to work somewhere in order to not die.
Nobody asked to be born, food kitchens exist.
>There is no free choice when signing a job contract.
False, you are 100% free to turn around and walk out the door even after you sign the job contract
>his could be mitigated by unions but those are basically nonexistent in usa.
False but I don't like unions anyway. The better alternative is worker collectives at a factory level not the equivalent of an overreaching federal organization.

Your post is garbage and you're retarded. Take some responsibility for yourself

>>49632528
how about employees don't get paid in cash and they just get paid in stock instead. then workers will own the means of production.

>>49633022
>Well, nepotism might play a role
No Moshe, it plays a massive role

>>49633027
That hasn't worked for the USA. Widening who was allowed to vote has had terrible consequences for the country.

>>49633029
>business and finance
>commie has no reasonable excuse for why he's a retarded commie
>muh /pol/! /pol/ /pol/ /pol/
many cases

>>49633044
A bankruptcy does not come with a name change for the CEO. We're going in circles, this exchange is over

>>49632916
Let's grant your wasteful-proles premise, why shouldn't the working poor act collectively to raise their wages to enable them to spend money on their frivolities and luxuries whilst still having enough to accumulate savings? Why ought they not collectively change the conditions of the economic structures they work under to gain more wealth in their actual conditions, inclusive of their moral defects?

>>49633166
>why shouldn't the working poor act collectively to raise their wages
Oh sorry friend, this is a factory. You're looking for the Senate

>>49631187
>what are layoffs
>what are 1-2% cost of living raises

Workers already take the vast brunt of company losses. They deserve more for their risk

>>49633034
Again no rebuttal, just frothing insults. I rest my case.

>>49633153
There is no liability for a limited liability company outside of the companies own assets. When a company is extinguished, the outstanding debts are extinguished, no employee or equity holder is liable for the outstanding debt of the former company.

>>49633211
>Workers already take the vast brunt of company losses
>lose a paycheck
>go next door and start getting new paycheck
>>49633240
Yes anon that has been understood from the get go. I'm not talking about it from the angle of financial debt I'm talking about reputation and credit

>>49633203
And who makes the laws the factory operates under that govern the conditions of employment? The government the working poor vote for. Who negotiates working conditions at an enterprise or in an industry? Labour acting collectivley in the form of unions.

>>49633122
>>commie has no reasonable excuse for why he's a retarded commie

>>49633305
>Who negotiates working conditions at an enterprise or in an industry? Labour acting collectivley in the form of unions
Think you're looking for OSHA friend. But if you need some rubber floormats I'm happy to take requests

>>49633268
The reputation and credit are with the company, that's what the company is there for, to limit the liability. The CEO with the golden handshake moves on to the next company, whose ability to attract investment and loans depend on the merits of that different corporate identities balance sheet.

>>49633268
>company loses money in a quarter
>employees lose 100% economics
>ceo gets a bonus

CEOs should get pay decreases more often, so they stop being incompetent

>>49631227
because it is. Jew.

>>49633396
I do like those European laws on salary ratios

>>49633268
>company loses money in a quarter
>employees lose 100% income
>ceo gets a bonus

CEOs should get pay decreases more often, so they stop being incompetent

>>49633328
You acting in a fictional world, not the real one that has 150+ years of labour laws and industry political action and settlement. Throw away the abstract fantasies of thought experiments and Robinson Crusoe textbooks, and look at the actual historically conditioned business world of reality.

>>49633056
https://www.statista.com/chart/18485/housing-wage-compared-to--median-hourly-wages/
these jobs under the housing wage are regular jobs that are respectable.

>False, terrible spending and saving habits
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/03/08/as-prices-rise-64-percent-of-americans-live-paycheck-to-paycheck.html
if 64 per cent of your country has terrible spending and saving habits, you need to do something else for a change,no?

>Nobody asked to be born, food kitchens exist.
indeed but why rely on charity when as the richest nation on the planet you can start programs and/or reforms that eliminate the need for charity in the first place? prevention is better than cure

>False, you are 100% free to turn around and walk out the door even after you sign the job contract
as i did not choose to start this life, I have to work and if all jobs I am realistically able to get share the aspect of exploitation there is no escape from this. suiciding is an option but I assume you dont just want me to die if I cant find a job im 100% satisfied with.

>False but I don't like unions anyway. The better alternative is worker collectives at a factory level not the equivalent of an overreaching federal organization.
i dont care what form it takes, the point is bargaining power that balances out with the power the company has.

>Your post is garbage and you're retarded. Take some responsibility for yourself
the average worker sheds sweat and tears in exchange for exploitation. it's time for companies to take some responsibility for the society they live in and pay a fair wage.

>>49633069
why do you insist on not paying people their hard earned money lmao? it doesnt even make that much of a difference since people will sell their stocks to live anyway.

>>49633105
i am a female trans hindu nationalist and i dont see a problem with all humans in a territory deciding their collective fate. I do agree that widening it to include money as free speech was terrible.

>>49633599
>these jobs under the housing wage are regular jobs that are respectable.
I agree housing prices are crazy. We should stop foreigners from being allowed to own property.
>you need to do something else for a change,no?
Human nature cannot be changed. People have access to a world of information and education, but they will still spend themselves in to poverty until they die with 0 savings
>you can start programs and/or reforms that eliminate the need for charity in the first place?
This is a trap though. Even if you have a UBI people will spend above their means. What are the odds the people who advocate for UBI would also be in favor of allowing people who still mismanage their money to starve to death? Of course they'd still want a safety net for the safety net.
>share the aspect of exploitation
It's not exploitation any more than we're all exploited by the need to eat. I don't expect you to be 100% satisfied and if you do then you should manage your expectations better.
>the point is bargaining power that balances out with the power the company has
power to do what?
>the average worker sheds sweat and tears in exchange for exploitation.
False, they do it in exchange for a wage that they're free to capitalize however they want. Unfortunate thing is most people take that paycheck and do absolutely nothing but shit with it

>>49631771
you are being sleazily dishonest, jude.
leftists are the one who ALWAYS bring up nordcuck countries as an example of working socialism, while it's: a. not working, b. not socialism.

>>49632336
mcdonalds doesnt pay them enough

>>49632073
>those on top of current hierarchy support current hierarchy
Wow fire up the presses anon. Of course losers need to band together and fight as one block, aka leftism. They have to to survive. And if they can't survive, they'll take you with them when they decapitate you.

Economic leftism is based if you're not in the top 5% or so. Anyone below that can be safely considered a loser, when you consider the unearthly disparity in wealth between them and the upper-crust.

>>49632073
take selfie and put it up in this board.

we will be the judge of how much of a chad your incel beta ass is

>>49633772
>I agree housing prices are crazy. We should stop foreigners from being allowed to own property.
although foreigners contribute, the usa is the country with the most billionaires and as such this is a domestic issue about domestic parasites.

>Human nature cannot be changed...
the economic and political structure of a country is not part of human nature. If we can hack people's brains in such a way they become pasty skellys, addicted to consumerist fads, why can we not hack our brains in such a way that benefits us all physically and mentally and in extension financially?

>This is a trap though. Even if you have a UBI...
a ubi is not what I'm advocating for but obviously every problem needs a holistic approach in order to solve it. just throwing money at a schizo will not make them less schizo. you need money AND therapy AND a way to build self worth.

>It's not exploitation any more than we're all exploited by the need to eat. I don't expect you to be 100% satisfied and if you do then you should manage your expectations better.
the need to eat is what is natural. the need of companies to take what i produce and give me the legal minimum reward for it regardless of the value i put into it is exploiting that need to eat for their own benefit.

>power to do what?
the power to exploit the worker. when these powers balance out, a real informed conversation can happen that treats both sides fairly.

>False, they do it in exchange for a wage.
a wage that is not commensurate with the value brought to the company. a wage that will not let me build a nest egg like the stolen profits the company takes to build its own nest egg. If you think money is useless to give to people anyway then why not come out and just give them houses and food directly? oh yeah company towns were done already because it works in the company's favour and makes workers even more dependent on the whims of their bosses.

ITT: butthurt commies

commies win the thread, capitalists seething

>>49632243
>christianity is spiritual communism

>>49634739
capitalist internet, chud

>>49634806
that makes you seethe even more, right? I get hard thinking about your acne cratered face getting red with anger because there is a socialist using the capitalist internet. "it's unacceptable", you think. "How does the socialist manage to use a thing that was made on the holy capitalist platform of 4chan". surprise chud... I'm trans capitalist!

>>49631227
We aren't under jew commie boots

>>49631252
Many such cases, it’s because without the safety of the group they have no power and no protection. Coward sapiens on a genetic level.

>>49631187
>t. literal retard

>>49635533
>Many such cases, it’s because without the safety of their money, political influence, state security apparatus they have no power and no protection. Coward sapiens on a genetic level.

Economic illiteracy is how you stay poor/incapable of accumulating wealth. Incapability to accumulate wealth is how you decide to turn to an ideology that promises to shower you with it for nothing.

>>49635778
>All socialist thinkers are/were poor and enjoyed no higher education

>>49631187
Why is <strawman> so bad?

>>49634766
It’s more like communism is secular Christianity. Or at least Marxism tends to be. The Marxist eschatology is communism. I don’t think “communism” is impossible or unsustainable (anymore than any other social system is, and all have been radically transformed by history), but Marxism in particular is very influenced by a Christian linear history towards redemption and salvation. But I also don’t know how useful of a framing that is for understanding it, since such eschatology isn’t even specific to Christianity. But different communist traditions have different ways of understanding what they’re doing, and it seems pretty typical of the Marxist school to philosophize about deep forces moving history towards communism, as well as divining the will of “the working class”. Other schools are more fixated on actively creating communism, or on “resisting” capitalism.

>>49635080
>I get hard thinking about your acne cratered face getting red with anger because there is a socialist using the capitalist internet. "it's unacceptable", you think.
The projection here is delicious

>>49631187
This is actually exactly what they're already doing

>>49631187
Isn't this basically something that would happen in a socialized system? Everyone has a piece of the pie so they have to share in the profits/debts and are responsible for the business' assets and liabilities.

>>49636092
come on say some more bootlicker shit

>>49636059
>but Marxism in particular is very influenced by a Christian linear history towards redemption and salvation
holy shit have you even read one single word from Marx in your life man? be honest

Wonder how many people in this thread have even read a chapter of das Kapital, yes, "commies" included

>>49632528
>fair share
no leftist ever can determine what they mean by this
neither do they have any arguments against what is the workers fair share of losses, if they demand a share from the profits of which they risk no capital

>>49634766
it applies slave morality, so yes

>>49632672
so where are all these hypothetical "superior" co-ops? why are they so rare?

>>49636262
it depends on the situation obviously, which is why a democratic workplace fits better as the workers can decide for themselves what is necessary for the company to keep and what is available to distribute as wage.

>>49636331
in a system that extremely favours and champions rent seekers, wage theft, and profit maximalisation, it's hard not to give in to it as an average business owner.

>>49636598
where are they? where are your superior co-ops?
if they are superior why are they not outcompeting the "wage thieving", "profit-maximizing" inferior corps?

>>49631227
Well then why don’t you also denounce communism and socialism?

>>49636653
they are suprior and you will find employees at coops to be better off in their private life as well as feeling better about their work life. In terms of valuing employees' humanity they are 100% outcompeting the megacorps. They are not outcompeting in terms of popularity because this system promotes and benefits rent seeking, wage theft, and profit maximalisation and as such they have less opportunity to become a more popular way of organizing a company.

>>49631479
Crony-capitalism is not free-market capitalism.

>>49636653
it wouldnt surprise me if most people dont even know what a coop is or why it's different from another type of company. This is all because of the capitalist propaganda spewed and sponsored by the bourgeoisie of course. class consciousness is low in the usa and this is one of the effects

>>49633022
>Well, nepotism might play a role but I do think the jew education is highly centered on the "academic" aspect.
Asians immigrants are also obsessed with the academic aspect. But despite being only 5% of the US population, Asians are not overrepresented in finance, politics and the media.

>>49636943
>it wouldnt surprise me if most people dont even know what a coop is
>class consciousness is low in the usa
im sure this might surprise you but biz isn't a US board, nor is this a US exclusive board
in fact when this thread was made, it wasn't even american hours and presumably most mutt posters were still asleep

yet every single commie, including the first post (>>49631227) just starting frothing at america for no reason
makes me wonder if you really are even commies or if im replying to a poorly-programmed bot right now

>What's your favorite communist game?
>Papers please.

>>49631187
>commies seething
Based OP
Communism only works through lies and useful idiots, never forget this anons.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Tgeorgescu

>>49637075
its because the usa is the biggest economy in the world, we all speak english and as such we all at least have some idea on the workings of the usa, it's a society extremely opposed to socialism (many people arguing stereotypical bs that socialism is accused of) and it is still an american website after all. Bc of this and more its just such an easy target to debate on. I could debate on the specifics of socialism in france or pakistan but no one will give a fuck

>>49631961
What are you rambling about you fucking moron lmao. You literally proved the guy you're agreeing with wrong, but went on to say you agree with him in spirit because you hate conservatives.

>>49631227
>why do americans believe anything that is remotely to the left equals communism?
Why don't you faggots read books?

>>49631418
That's not how projection works, retard.

>>49631635
Yeah that's cool and all, but China.

>>49631730
>is racist
>this will get the working class on our sides
Lmao commies are the easiest niggers to influence
Your revolution will end when a black man can’t have his mansion.

>>49631725
Hitler was more libertarian than you, faggot.
Read a book.

>>49631187
Debts are shared. If the company goes under everyone gets fired.

>>49631227
Because the soviet union was the epicenter of leftism.

>>49636242It's true. Marx was secular millinerian. He explicitly stated that socialist revolution was inevitable, and the end result of all economic history. If that isn't a linear world view with a salvation narrative then nothing is.

>>49631887
>late thirties thinking that they'd "make it big" with "hard work"
I'm making it rich trading internet coins you stupid fuck (eventually)

>>49636059
Jonestown is Marxism in a nutshell.
Devious master plan to subvert Christian concepts to serve new industrial era ideals turns into:
>I hecking love niggers so much, yay suicide!

>>49632475
>almost half of americans can be labeled as "liberals"
They have been deceived. They have no idea what the American left really is. They don't listen to them. They are completely unplugged ads only get a vague idea based on how the media portrays the left. They just show up and vote blue without even reading the party platform. Something like the vast majority of democrats voters found the 2020 party platform abhorrent when it was shown to them. They simply weren't aware.

>>49631933
Why do you think it solves anything? Why promote a policy that's already being tried in many places without being aware of even one of these experiments?
Coops are fucked, in practice they create entire towns run by mobster families. To get a factory job you buy access like a vassal offering tribute or marry into one of the mobster families.

>>49631187
Now apply the same logic to taxes. Go on, defend it

>>49636242
Yes, Marx would deny it but the influence is there. He is inconsistent across his writings but he has a mostly linear historical account, and in capitalism there is a potential for the underclass, the working class, to abolish class society and bring us to a redemption. He renounces Hegel but he has Hegel's linear historical account too, but for Hegel it is the spirit that is developing itself through history to progressively achieve the realization of itself. Marx is inconsistent on it because he has two kinds of opposing inclinations, one that is more scientific and one that is more philosophical, and the deeply philosophical side of him constantly critiques and questions everything, whereas the scientific side keeps trying to instantiate certain analytic categories for his theoretical project to help him understand how to create communism. That predates his communism, when Marx was a liberal he still had a fixation with freedom and such. He developed out of liberalism because he was disillusioned with it, because he understood it was contrary to his values, which remained as freedom for humanity. His life's work is basically reconciling the building of an analytic framework for framing his scientific research into socio-historical development with his very honed critical philosophy. Read the last pages of Capital vol 3 and you'll see Marx's method of criticism culminate in a incidentally ironic moment. Marx couldn't complete his 3rd volume, but we have the published skeleton either way, and it ends with Marx questioning what the basis of the analytical category of "class" is. It ends with
>here the manuscript breaks off

>>49631187
They don't understand risk/reward and incentives/punishment. They blame capitalism for their shitty motivation and low risk lifestyle.

>>49631252
SPBP

>>49638883
>>49636242
For reference, the final page of volume 3.

But, I'd actually still consider myself a communist. I've just broken with Marx and maybe moved closer to Stirner, even though I don't care for "anarchism" and I wouldn't wholly endorse Stirner. But I think Stirner was right for trying to build his milk store, even if it turned out he sucked at selling milk.

>>49631941
NO
HE
DOESSSSNNNTTT
FUFUIUCKGKGKHOTHFDPOJ

>>49638809
Taxes are theft

>>49636653
>>49636838
They simply can't raise capital. Young companies need equity for startup, and the risk/reward distribution is quite bad for potential cooperatives. A normal capitalist has to invest either mostly their own savings, or find some wealthy partners to help with the startup. Lenders likely won't be interested for the same reason as cooperative founders themselves, they'd need to levy a high interest rate on the loan to adjust for the risk of a new business, and probably need to defer payments until the business can generate operating cash flow. The cooperative founders would be implicitly looking for such a rate on their own equity, since they could theoretically put it in a safe market account and generate average returns. They'd have to have an alternative value, which would likely be control or freedom or something ideological like that. But you'll find that most people are risk-averse, and there is still a higher premium placed on money advanced for marginal control/freedom. They'll start questioning how much control/freedom they are really going to get for their money, and they'll start thinking about whether they want to be married to the business. By advancing enough savings to get started you'd be locking yourself up in the success of this one enterprise to a significant degree.

As a result, the big push of the cooperative lobby has been to get the federal government to have more favorable lending conditions for worker coops through the SBA, and in fact under Trump's admin there was even some changes to the SBA's practices that favored coops a little more. People handwave away this problem but I think it is a deeper one than they'd like to admit, particularly Marxists. The working class will advance its savings, which are in fact no insignificant, to mutual funds, pensions and banks that get invested into capitalist businesses rather than pool them to fund their own control.

>>49631187
Commies are just part of many groups that in order to push a change, they use propaganda and arguments that their goal is to grab people. However you must be pretty fucking illiterate if you think any serious economists thinks Marx had any issue with your pic. And this is part of the same propaganda that has been used for ages by diverting the discussion into irrelevant points that aren't controversial but the general population can understand and so they think they are debating something. And no I don't think Marxists are worse or whatever economy is a limited field of study that cannot by itself answer the question as to how we should run this world and most of the times it just studies and describes what already happens. For example the labor theory of value is a way of understanding how the value of an object is created. There are many different variants of the Labor theory of value and it is rejected by many economists but in the end it is just a way to understand how value is created. Marx, using his own version of the LTV then argued that this created and exploitative system which would led to many things, and this is where you have to pause and understand that the LTV doesn't predict this or implies this, this becomes historical materialism which is a whole new thing. This part concerning social and economic revolutions is a much more difficult question to answer and you should be able to understand that looking into the past there have been many systems that have lasted much more than the modern market economists the fedoras here cream about and still they got changed. What will happen, I don't believe we can tell precisely but it is retarded to keep talking about moot point.

>>49639646
Incidentally in the 20s there was a movement among labor unions called the "labor banking" movement. Some unions started their own banks so they could coordinate the savings of their members for the sake of either the union narrowly, or a wider ideological project of socialism etc. There were some proponents of this for years who were simply rejected in union voting, but a sea change happened because unions began to feel more acutely that banks were siding with management during labor disputes. Most of the labor banks were pretty shoddy operations that seemed to just funnel fees to brokers for deposits, alternatively they were often started by very eager unionists who unfortunately were very ill equipped to run a bank. But the most outstanding example was the Amalgamated Clothing Worker's bank, which actually did intend to align itself with the cooperative movement and ended up building some cooperative housing in New York (I think some of it still exists). The Amalgamated Bank has even survived to today, although it has obviously changed a lot and isn't very aligned with its old mission.

>>49637038
asians dont have an IQ as high as ashkenazi jews tho.

>>49631187
Workers do participate in the losses of the company, i.e. they lose their jobs if not enough money is coming in.

>>49639877
AND IN ADDITION I'd just say that some of the Marxist aversion to capitalist analytical frameworks is childish and they should read more of it. But not so much the economists, most are very uninteresting. Economists usually just concern themselves with justifying inequality, it's a modern secular theodicy. Theories of finance are a little more useful, because they're often built by people looking to understand how to make money in finance. It's in a sense more of a practical research project, so its categories are tested more by their utility in the competitive game of finance. Risk is a useful category, IMO, and the way risk is distributed helps understand the moves in the financial game. Unions sometimes use risk tolerance as a test, they test potential collaborators in the company by seeing how much risk they'll handle. They're looking for people with a high risk tolerance to carry the weight of the union drive. Most people don't have that, which is why the union organizers want to identify where the risk tolerance is so they know the value of their assets. In that sense I think, for a broad movement, building something like the labor banks was a smart project to attempt, you distribute the risk of investment in socialist struggle across more people. At various times the premium on ideology changes too, you have societal moments where people strongly value control and moments when they don't. The finance and business people have their science, and the Marxists just cede a lot of that territory because they don't want to feel like they're playing the same game.

>>49631227
conservatards were taught Disney logic anon. Black and white, they have just enough brain matter to retain what Tucker said for a few days without being relayed more instructions.

Ironically the worse capitalism fails the more they believe in the model.

>>49640636
>muh tucker
snagged another leftist

>>49631187
>economically illiterate
lmao the terrible irony

>>49639910
IQ is a skill, not intelligence anon. Intelligence or being smart is a highly subjective thing. What most people would call smart is people with charisma/accolades/success/attractiveness and generally not factor in the typical major factors of starting position/probability/long-term benefits for humanity

>>49631187

My goal in life is to get rich off of shorting the economy, supplant Musk and Bezos as the richest person in the world, and then implement fully automated gay luxury space communism.

>>49631418
cringe

you never offered them that option liar

>>49631252
it's crazy how often third worlders bring up america out of nowhere

>>49643073
They do have that option, but they generally won't take it. In 2019 approximately 1/3 of the country filed tax returns under $30,000 gross income. 1/4 made between 40k and 75k, and that was approximately above the 50th percentile. According to the Fed's data, that income group had an average of $16,500 to $28,700 in savings (those two numbers are from the 40th percentile to the 80th, but the 80th percentile was a high income bracket of from 75k to 100k a year so you can assume $16,500 as the average). That is roughly 30 million people with $16,500 allocated to savings, or about $500 billion in capital. That is a pretty hefty fund, could be used to acquire a lot. Why isn't capital pooled in this way by the working class? That is a deep rabbit hole.

>>49631741
>uneducated hourly worker.
Some communist you are.

>>49643953
people with kids and the elderly aren't going to invest their last 15k they keep for emergencies.

>>49631741
What happened to seize the means of reproduction and take back the capital from the Bourgeoisie?
Man, I bet you're American too.

>>49644094
The numbers are messy out there but I think that is a convenient story, which I also thing is a favorable assumption communists make to their detriment. FINRA has data from 2015 (maybe better data but I haven't looked that closely before) that suggests 50% of households with incomes from $25k to $50k have retirement and taxable investment accounts (mostly retirement). Pew says that group between 35k and 60k has a median holding of $12k, and while I'm acclimated to thinking that kind of number sounds high it is mostly because of credit card, auto and mortgage debt, which sinks people's net worth into negative territories. But that means $12k set aside in investments for a pretty large group that definitely works for a living, which aggregates to potentially hundreds of billions. That money could be used to invest in development of mutual property, worker owned or otherwise, but instead it is advanced to capitalist investment. Why? And why does it seem there is no particular interest (at least directly) in moving that money to building mutualistic relationships to property?

>>49644773
it's hard for people to agree, but at the same time the whales are not making it easy, it's not like you'll welcome with open arms a new commune company if you want to be a monopoly in the same business.

>>49644858
>it's hard for people to agree
That's true, but the explanation of why it is hard for them to agree seems theoretically necessary for practical action, because communists in general kind of waffle on their theory of political change. There is a mix of a belief in the need for political education and a belief in the rational self-interest of the working class as a group. For instance, if the working class isn't acting in its rational self-interest, then the theoretical move is to often search for a source of repression/suppression of their will. Like the current focus on legislation around union organizing, although there seems to not be as much reflection on the fact that union organizing was born in conditions of illegality, and that the labor movement period in the US involved people dying in clashes with police and state troops for their union. But communists have a tendency now to believe that the big issue for union organizing is stuff like captive audience meetings. I think there is a question of why people were willing to die for unions in the early 20th century, and why they are now dissuaded from unions by simply being forced to hear their managers prattle on for a couple of hours.

>>49645372
I'm not a communist, but I see a flaw in Capitalism version 1. A lot of babies that inherited from daddy doing nothing; it should not be possible for anyone to inherit billions without working at all for it; I don't even say to give all that money to random people: give them at least to the rich people who were self-made.

>>49645465
>I'm not a communist, but I see a flaw in Capitalism version 1.
Favorable for you, because you'll have a lot less of their ideological baggage. But I agree with everything you said except that I'm probably more extreme in that I don't think "rich" people should exist at all. I don't really think extinguishing all income disparity is possible, at least I'm not convinced it could be achieved without a hugely repressive apparatus that would be self-defeating, but trying to achieve zero inequality is a goal state I'd balance other goals with.

>>49632061
Wait, it's almost like communism is a jewish ideology. Created by jews, advanced by jews, supported and love by jews.

I feel like we made a great discovery today friends.

>>49631227

>>49631343
That is not true

>>49633010
Why? They bought the government for a fair price. The bailouts are simply their just returns.

>>49631976
Not really, there are many types of jobs that have little contact with clients or not at all. Id give you examples of stuff I do on the side

>take photographs and sell prints online
I dont take pics for clients, I take pics for myself, of stuff I like. The selling is automated, I dont make the prints or deal with it at all. Literally never had to talk to any of my clients
>mining eth
No clients
>have some vending machines
Again, I dont have to talk to anyone

Im sure you can find a trillion other stuff to do where you dont receive orders from anyone.

I've played summoner necro my whole life and now everything else seems lonely

>>49646757
communism = judaism = satanism

>>49631343
Odd how I'm able to fire my own bosses then

>>49631418
Try again, lad. Or don't.

>>49631635
>t. commie

>>49636653
Co-ops aren't seen in most areas of business simply because the nature of counterparty risk makes it more risky than it is profitable, when compared to other manners of organizing capital. More hands reaching into the same jar for more cookies, higher chance of someone taking your cookies away from you.

Humans are so fundamentally untrustworthy in word and deed that anything more complex than 1-to-1 contractual relationships cannot be properly or fairly arbitrated, in most cases. Especially for contractual relationships whose risks and liabilities cannot be quantified and often aren't even considered qualitatively except perhaps tacitly, implicitly by both parties.

>>49631300
how do you dumb fucking faggots still manage to function enough to breath? you just watched two years of lockdowns and a complete evisceration of small business then say shit like this lmao. we deserve to be nuked by china.

>>49631187
>stakeholder capitalism
kek

>>49639683
>the labor theory of value is a way of understanding how the value of an object is created
>value of an object is created

This pretty quickly moves into the realm of metaphysics (the nature of reality, perception), so here we go. I'm essentially paraphrasing Kant's "Critique of Pure Reason":

The "value" of an object is not created, it is inherent in the object itself - or, more precisely, our perception of that value is inherent in our representation of the object. We see an object and immediately recognize its value based on its relationship to our own perceived values and ideals. By projecting value onto objects, we risk making the mistake of associating our value of the object with the object itself - but, objectively speaking, the object has no value in and of itself. It just is.

From some guy's dissertation on Kant's "Critique of Pure Reason":
"Objects in themselves are objects apart from our representations of them. In spite of the fact that they cannot be known, objects in themselves are significant insofar as the false belief that we can know them is an inevitable result of the capacity of the subject to combine representations in different ways, including the combination of representations in the concept of an unknowable object."

There's many different ways to value an object based on subjective representation. There is no value of the object "in and of itself" to us, because our subjective representations are inherently, well, subjective. This also applies to labor and the fruits of one's labor - it has different values to different people, and none in and of itself which we can perceive, as our perception is limited to our own and not that of some void non-subjective observer.

The labor theory of value pretty completely falls apart as one comes to terms with the fact that labor in itself has no value. Hence why labor markets exist and the value of labor is determined by the subjective consensus of its utility.

>>49645465
>a flaw in Capitalism version 1. A lot of babies that inherited from daddy doing nothing
This is a human condition which cyclically repeats in the upper echelons of civilization throughout history. It is not inherent to capitalism. However, capitalism has a self regulating mechanism to fix that: it makes it a lot easier for stupid and lazy people to lose their money to smarter and more enterprising people. It being a lot easier to lose (be stupid or lazy, "unfit") than win is fundamental to nature's selection process, not capitalism itself. In a monarchy for instance, a family line could go on for hundreds of years - power and wealth maintained simply for existing in that position. In capitalism, the next son in the line can say fuck it and lose literally everything to a coked out hooker binge which ends with him having his entire identity extorted out of him by a roving gang of SEAniggers. Hardly a fair or comprehensive comparison, I know, but which would you prefer?

>>49650533
I believe there's a certain level of wealth that even stupid people can't lose (easily). Take the daughter of a billionaire for example after all her relatives died for some reason. She's gonna be a queen of an empire with an already established Foundation of people already managing the money for her so her "stupid ancestors" might take at least decades (usually centuries) to lose it all (e.g. the Rothschilds still have millionaire grandchildren around).

That's why I believe there should be a limit; e.g. yeah ok keep up to 10mil on current buying power; but 100bil? fuck off.

I'd rather it went to other rich people but who are self-made instead of that nonsense.

>>49635080
>I get hard thinking about your acne cratered face

Faggot lol

>>49650835
>I believe there's a certain level of wealth that even stupid people can't lose (easily)
*blocks your path*

>>49631635
Most based post here

>>49631187
>lmao stupid commies dialectical materialism is just made up

>>49631828
Aren't the rich and the Jews the same people?

>>49650142
The LTV of Marx, which is just an adjustment to Ricardo's theory, mainly describes the distribution of labor in the economy. The problem that gave rise to value theory was the question of what determines the magnitudes of prices, because when supply and demand net out at equilibrium it is unclear what makes one thing more expensive than another. AND these magnitudes seem consistent. A bushel of wheat can cost a lot in a special circumstance of low supply, but in average conditions where supply approaches demand it seems bushels of wheat never cost more than a castle. The early classical economists simply noted that objects have differential material costs, so a rational economy that reproduces itself would have to have prices that correspond to there differences in material costs, and then tried to explain how the market economy spontaneously achieved this. Going all the way back to Aristotle they have gravitated towards considering labor the prime constraint that is comparable. You might say time is, but the leap to labor time is that it is self-evident any production process requires a person to use the tools and materials, so the measurement of the time to produce is actually the measurement of the time a laborer takes to produce, given certain technical conditions. So Ricardo called his labor values the technical conditions of production, which don't vary with supply and demand. They only vary with innovations in the technical conditions, like more efficient machines, but even if a product's price may fluctuate by supply and demand, it has no direct effect on how long it takes to make it. So he felt he had found the gravitational point that prices pull to, the source of equilibrium.

His dilemma was that, mathematically, equilibrium prices STILL didn't correspond to labor values. This was for a pretty simple reason, which he understood but didn't know how to reconcile.

>>49652465
This was because the profit rate isn’t determined by labor values, and when the profit rate changed prices changes in complicated ways. Further, these complicated changes were because changing the profit rate changes the relative shares of income, ie if profit rates are up then a larger proportion of income goes to owners of capital than to labor, but furthermore companies have different cost structures that change their exposure to this. So if you have more operating expenses in labor, you are more exposed to the money costs of labor. If it goes down this benefits you disproportionately, even though the technical conditions haven’t changed. It still takes an hour or whatever to make so many sheets of metal, but now the equilibrium price has actually shifted independently, because the money cost of labor changed independently.

Marx’s answer to this problem was complicated, too much for me to want to write it, but ultimately it doesn’t matter because it was wrong. Prices still diverged from labor values according to variations in the returns to different factors. But there is an answer to the problem, and all it does really is keep a conservation of labor that was actually absent before. Marx and Ricardo counted direct and indirect labor, the labor used in the firm and the labor indirectly used to make the inputs the firm acquired for production. What was missing was the labor used to create the other factors, which in a simple model would just be the capitalist household. If you include that labor, which is the labor they consume in the profit rate (after investment etc.), labor values correspond to prices. So the labor values becomes and index of where labor is going in the real economy, and the differences in the profit rate just correspond to differing bargaining positions, which Marx called the “class struggle”.

>>49631187
Because the book that commies get started with is nearly 200 years old and is based on outdated economics.

>>49631227
Because the average American is fucking stupid when it comes to politics.

>>49653197
But having explained all of that I still diverge from Marx and most Marxists. The theory can be made consistent, but Marxism really doesn’t pivot around the LTV. It’s about the class struggle, and I personally dispute Marx’s manner of thinking of history and class. The LTV is not that useful, and not even that special. Its self evident that money has disproportionate buying power, and there is at any moment a zero-sum game of distribution of resources. The LTV restates this as distribution of labor. I personally don’t see what it matters to the social calculus. People are ok with inequality (to varying degrees) right now, and if you restate that as inequality in the distribution of social labor between the productive factors of capital and labor, it’s just like saying some people have more money and some don’t. I think Marxists fixate on it too much, as though it will awaken people. It has been around for well over a hundred years now and it hasn’t radically altered most people’s beliefs.