/lit/ - Literature

>>17876687
Markets bad
I'm trans btw

gibsmedat

>>17876695
>>17876696
what

>>17876698
sorry, that poster simplified it a bit too much, it's

"gibs me dat (give me things) fo' free"

>>17876715
This but you forgot
I'm trans btw

>>17876687
give me that for free

>>17876687
give me that for free

>>17876847
Ah yes the Brazzaville school of economics

>>17876687
Give me that for free

The fundamental essence of capitalism is capital accumulation, e.g workers work to produce surplus value, which the capitalist then appropriates and realizes as money or the means by which money is made, which is then reinvested in other similarly productive ventures.

>>17876687
subvert Western society
borders should disappear
no one should have private property
I'm trans btw

>>17876687
Capitalism explained

>>17876687
Atheism

>>17876889
a truly groundbreaking text lmao

>>17876687
capitalism good, but not as good as communism.

it would be okay and everything if it could be realized in any form that isn't a murderous asiatic despotism

>>17876687

>>17876687
>>17877768

>>17877785
>>17877768
why do these always leave out the fact that most or all of that value would disappear without investment from the boss/investors and they get the lions share because they put up the resources to make the entire thing work and its from their investment that you profit as a worker

>>17877842
>value would disappear without investment from the boss/investors
[citation needed]

>>17877785
>>17877768
So do marxists have a way to calculate your actual value or is it mostly rhetoric?

>>17877869
>creates an economy that has a depression or a recession every five years, for over a century, and has not exhibited any signs of inventing ways to cope with recessions or depressions
>B-B-B-BUT HOW WILL YOU CALCULATE VALUE

>>17877853
you do realize someone has to put up the resources to create and maintain a business right?

>>17877880
So ill take that as a no

>>17877880
are you telling me you genuinely believe that the existence of economic downturns is a convincing argument to destroy society and adopt a system that you cant even explain and appears to make no sense?

answer the question, how is value calculated when interpreted as a product of labour?

>>17876698
Poltards. They have trouble thinking and communicating.

>>17876909
This.

>>17877869
It is just parroting imaginary debates that they had with themselves when they were taking a shower, just see how angry they get when you point out their fallacies or lack of competence, this is why they don't want to debate. They also have a childish impulse to be the one with the last post giving them the false sense of winning a argument.

Sowell's Marxism is the best summation you'll get of it.

>>17877944
this is true. Sowell is a based exMarxist.

>>17877944
No.

>>17877899
>destroy society
society's destroyed, m8. it might look nice to you because you're sitting pretty on a continent of stolen surplus. go gibber about value in a poor person's face and tell them how great it is. go across the globe and be the prophet of capital, be it's martyr. go die out there for your false god.

>>17877973
Yes. Sowell isn't about "inspiring" readers on Marx. He just presents the quotes and elucidates.

That's all you need.

>CAPITALISM BAD

>>17876687
>>17877768
>>17877785

>>17876695
based

>>17877974
but..but how is moving to a labour based value system going to help poor people if you cant even explain how the value is calculated relative to labour? what kind of point do you think you are making here?

>>17876687

>>17878083
oh nononono marxist bros it is just propaganda!

>>17876687
Thoroughly debunked.

rich man bad

>>17876687
never been tried

>>17878083
>>17878106
>Romanians only lived to 60 in the. 1950s
>couldn’t have anything to do with the war
So now that they’re in a moderate soc-dem mode, who from the 1960s is making it to 76?
Couldn’t be ex-tanky bloc kids.

Worthless chart

>>17878149
Well, you’ve never tried to learn anything about it, certainly

>>17878150
this. communism is actually based because it falls apart and turns into authoritarianism and authoritarianism is based

>>17878150
>nuh uh tis actually totally the war, nothing else wrong in this utopia
spooky faggot take

>>17876687

-Per Smith, Ricardo, physiocrats et al., the familiar categories of the economy have distinct aspects (pic related). These can be compared and contrasted.

-Capitalism bad because capitalist extract profit from workers. Also >>17876696

-We can make up a little algebraic expression for how money, goods, services etc flow in an economy, and (ex)change into one another. "M-C-M' " for example stands for capital raised to put together a factory which produces commodities, which are then exchanged for new/different money (revenue, profit). In contrast, a barter economy not involving money would have transactions like C-C', and a modern financial economy can involve payment for particular financial products (investments, bank accounts, etc, not (immediately) involving any particular commodity): M-M'.

-Hey there's bonus content in volume 2 and 3 too, guys, about credit/debt, rent, etc. Also Grundrisse, Theories of Surplus Value etc if you're feeling very autistic. Ever read the MECW?

>>17878229
it works for china

Not even a commie but the retards who flock to Marx threads and spam “muh ltv deboonked” and “Mao personally killed 5 trillion people” are very annoying.

>>17876695
FPBP

>>17878312
can you explain why these are not valid points?

>>17877785
wtf I'm a commie now

>>17878323
1. Ltv is a total midwit filter and is hardly even relevant to Marx’s overall theory
2. Capitalism has killed just as many if not more, as have pre socialist famines in Russia/China. Of course lolberts just redefine capitalism whenever you point this out but most actual historians will agree Ie; Late Victorian Holocausts

>>17878323
because they are false

>>17878312
>>17878350
>Not even a commie
>Capitalism has killed just as many if not more,
>most actual historians will agree Ie; Late Victorian Holocausts

>>17878350
>redefine capitalism
Or you braindead cretins just keep capitalism as vague as possible to counter balance the death toll of the communists.

>>17877842
Are you trolling? Serious question.

>>17878393
no, and let me guess, you cant actually explain what is wrong with my statement, correct?

>>17878169
>>17878178
No, it is a worthless chart. I’m not even a tanky.

>>17878402
Rich people do not supply anything not already stolen by them. They’re a worthless layer that would not be missed

>>17878404
its not worthless though, it shows how people raised under communism ended up living longer

>>17878384
Yes. Politics are stupid, your ideology will never take off and I have better things to worry about.
I really wish both lolberts and commies would just own up to the death toll of their systems and I wish Marx spam threads would go to pol because clearly nobody here cares about what Marx actually wrote.
>>17878386
Nah we’re pretty clear with what capitalism is. It’s lolberts who redefine it as any form of trade to circumvent criticism.

>>17878404
>commie
>not a tanky
oh nononono

>>17878416
>your ideology
My what? You sound like someone who has no self-awareness, or any awareness really, at all.

>>17878393
Are you?

>>17878408
...so what exactly happens if you get rid of the rich, and every business is run communally, but one factory does extremely well compared to others, and those who split the profit of that factory become rich and use that excess wealth to coerce people into working for them for more money then they would otherwise be making on their own?

also how is it wrong that they "steal wealth" in order to advance their position when that is literally what you are advocating for?

>>17877785
Yes, you create value at work, this is true. However, you go to work to create value because you are too dumb to create it by yourself. You use a structure provided for you - say, a restaurant - and contribute to it, thus generating value.
The problem with wage-slave peabrains is that they don't understand that they are easily replaced and that it's the structure they occupy that generates most of the value. You work in a restaurant chain of which you don't pay the rent for the building, using a recipe you didn't make, for a brand you didn't do the marketing for; these aspects of the business are the actual heavy lifting. You just clock in and turn your brain off, because that's all you're good for.

>>17878434
I’m talking about any ideology. It doesn’t really matter whether or not I sound like I have self awareness, wanting political threads to fuck off I was very clear about. Nobody here on either side even cares about what Marx said they’re just coming in with preconceptions and spamming the same 5 talking points everybody has seen before.

>>17878384
>Capitalism has killed just as many if not more,
That's a fallacious statement because it doesn't take into account the history of both systems. Of course, capitalism has killed more people because it has existed for way longer than communism, but communism is responsible for the greatest human tragedies in recent history.
>inb4 not real communism
More word games. If that is your line of thinking, then you must agree that everything that leftists say is fascism today isn't real fascism, and Protestantism isn't real Christianity.
>>17878434
>I don't have an ideology, you do. Therefore, I'm right.
It's solipsism, and it's a time honored marxist tradition. Christian's, Buddhists, and scientists can play this game too.

>>17878436
No.
https://youtu.be/YMdIgGOYKhs

>>17878442
So you imagine a collective of one business bribing coercing others... to do what? No one’s going to need to do this. Again, a non accumulative currency is also a good idea. Share the wealth, stop thinking yourself so above others for no good reason
>also how is it wrong to enslave people?
I don’t like it. I don’t like that my lofe has been squandered, I don’t like seeing a dozen homeless encampments to and from this dull and detrimental job. I don’t like the direction the world is going
>go into business yourself. You too stupid?
No. I’m not a sociopath who would feed into this shit system

>>17878482
>That's a fallacious statement because it doesn't take into account the history of both systems. Of course, capitalism has killed more people because it has existed for way longer than communism, but communism is responsible for the greatest human tragedies in recent history.
Totally wrong. Let me guess you think the Gulag Archipelago is accurate lmao?

>>17878502
Joke's on you, I haven't read it.

>>17878514
What tragedies? Nothing capitalism hasn’t done in the same time frame.
>Famines
See third world. Also not a result of communism but of rapid industrialization.
>Political repression
See McCarthy, South Korea, Pinochet, Hitler, etc.

>>17878489
>to do what
to work in their factory so they dont have to, or increase its value output
>no one’s going to need to do this
so you think no one would work in a factory for more money then they would otherwise get because.. well you didn't actually give a reason? this really does not make nay sense
>a non accumulative currency
how does a currency have value if it is invalidated when exchanged? the entire point of currency is that it represents value that can be exchanged between two parties, how would a currency function if it cannot be used to exchange value?

Why bother arguing with these people, they'll never learn. All the failed attempts in the 20th century mean nothing to them.

>>17878523
>See third world. Also not a result of communism but of rapid industrialization.
Not real capitalism.
>See McCarthy, South Korea, Pinochet, Hitler, etc.

>>17878536
Wot

>>17878539
On a phone and copypasted wrong.

>>17878526
They don’t want to work why? So one of them wants an early retirement. They make other arrangements and work their home gardens or something. The other people wouldn’t be coerced into working for people for less money/vouchers. That’s just a bonkers idea.

> so you think no one would work in a factory for more money
Just to reiterate. It would be for less. That’s how capitalism works. They’d be better off not selling out. If this were to happen in a feeble Ayncapistan, using bitcoins, the people would figure out they’re getting another raw deal and they’d defect to the Autonomous Direct Democracies

>how does a currency have value
It actually doesn’t. The true value is always within the neighbor and the resources of the earth. Currency is just an exchange token. We need to stop valuing it

https://youtu.be/Imh7W0Q1oyA

>>17878572
>. The other people wouldn’t be coerced into working for people for less money/vouchers. That’s just a bonkers idea.
you dont understand, they are getting more than they would otherwise make at their own shitty factory because the massively successful factory owners can afford to pay them more then their share of the value would be if they stayed on their own
>Just to reiterate. It would be for less.
just to reiterate, no, it wouldn't be less if you won your own factory and you're barely scrapping by and not making any profit, someone with an extremely successful factory could easily offer you more than what you are making

>It actually doesn’t.

so why would anyone exchange goods for it if its worthless?

>>17878606
*own

>>17876695
kill yourself tranny

>>17877785
kill yourself faggot

>>17878643
Lol

>>17878643
>Anonymous
>2014
Kys bootlicker

>>17878572
>Currency is just an exchange token. We need to stop valuing it
Is this a joke? currencies function as an exchange token is extremely useful for society as a whole and individuals of all walks of life who want to exchange goods, labour, and value etc. and it cannot fulfill that function if it is not valued. you are literally suggesting a form of currency that is literally incapable of fulfilling its roll because a currency is required to make your ideas begin to make sense, but on the other hand you dont think currency should be valued because "DUDE MONEY IS LE EVIL xD", even though, once again, you explicitly need it have value for it to work within the framework of your ideas

these mental gymnastics are on another level, are you short circuiting butters?

In starting to think there are more right wing shills than left

>>17878748
>being a consuming fatass
Not real right-wing.

>>17877973
>Naomi Klein endorsement.
Well, that certainly makes it more credible.

>>17878748
Marxism is just low hanging fruit.

>>17878748
Liberalism is a disease.

>>17878748
if youre going to blame you being BTFO on shills like a schizoid, boy do I have a board for you!

>>17878444
Imagine effortposting this hard for a fucking comic about a cat.

>>17878723
>as an exchange token is extremely useful for society as a whole
Uh, yeah, okay kid. So let’s knock it down to size as a non accumulative currency.
It can fulfill its function without overshadowing human worth. You worried about incentives? You need people to be incentivized by greed, anon? You like that the world is ruled by sociopathic killers without a thought to total human genocide?
>LE EVIL
Dude. There is a fucking logic to this. Stop being such a dullard cringe-lord

>>17878803
Marketing. Don’t ya love em?

>>17878899
>It can fulfill its function
how can it fulfill its function when there is literally no reason for anyone to give up goods they have created in exchange for it because its worth is instantly invalidated the moment it is stamped? why would it even exist at all? this isn't a matter of greed its about literally fulfilling a basic vital function, the exchange of goods and value

>>17878919
L A B O R
V O U C H E R
VALUE EACH OTHER. NOT GAME TOKENS
https://youtu.be/ryQTT-roui8

>>17878929
WHY
WOULD
ANYONE
GIVE UP THEIR GOODS
FOR A CURRENCY THAT IS NOT WORTH ANYTHING AND THEY CANNOT DO ANYTHING BUT WIPE THEIR ASS WITH IT

why cant you answer the question?

>>17878939
The currency they use now is not only worthless, it’s detrimental. Transferring it to a labor voucher would make something that is “good” into something great.
Answered yet? How many other ways do you need it answered?

>>17878954
no, not answered, very obviously.
>The currency they use now is not only worthless,
no it isnt, it fulfills its job as an exchange medium because it is backed up by a government, and perhaps most importantly, and I cant believe i have to point this out, when you offer it to someone, they will exchange goods and services for your currency because they know they can take that currency and reuse it somewhere else to purchase goods and services of their own need/desire . if they cannot exchange the currency for something , then you might as well be throwing grass clippings at them and demanding a sports car in exchange

>>17878981
The currency has no value. It’s a symbol and a debt. Who values debt? Obviously the creeps who push the debt on his slave class.

>… they will exchange goods and services for your currency because they know they can take that currency and reuse it somewhere else to purchase goods and services…
This is done with labor vouchers too. I’m not seeing any question marks. I think I have answered your question and you’re just being dense

If the state wants you to value grass clippings, you do it.

>>17878954
Labour vouchers are fucking insane, and it's crackpot ideas like this why commies always end up killing millions. The purpose of money is to shift around numbers, and this labor voucher idea is literally just a retardation on that ability to shift around numbers. It's just retarded on all levels.

>>17879014
>The currency has no value
it literally does have value, because people trust that they can exchange it for goods

>This is done with labor vouchers too.
then what makes them any different than a normal currency?

>>17879015
The voucher wasn’t possible till the invention of the computer, so your cold war kid blurt is misplaced. (YESSSSS. THE USSR WAS DOING STATE CENTRALIZED CAPITALISM)
> shift around numbers
This is a naïve perspective. (Retarded, one would say) It’s property of accumulation is obviously built to make some artificially of a higher rank than the masses. Unjustifiable hierarchies, anon. Call me antisemitic, but I don’t like those

>>17879042
>This is a naïve perspective.
your entire political and economic belief systems are held together by nothing but the power of friendship

>they unironically defend this guy
Why?

>>17879028
>because people trust
Because guns, anon.
> what makes them any different than a normal currency?
The non accumulative property eliminates, theft of ones earned currency, bribery, corruption, debts, banks, sociopathic overlords

>>17879014
things are worth whatever people are willing to pay for them, case to case, context to context. Check out Human Action by Ludwig Von Mises.

>>17879055
>Because guns, anon.
yes, i already pointed that out in the previous post
>The non accumulative property
how is it nonaccumulative?

>>17879052
The tweaks to the system I suggest would lead to such a society that values strong community. Don’t belittle it. Try to imagine it.

>>17879063
you are forgetting the part where you cant actually explain how you will make billions of variables fall into place in order to make your system function

>>17879058
How much for the Mona Lisa?

>>17879061
Read (or listen to the link I gave) Towards a New Socialism. Get the whole thing down. It’s a voucher not money.

>>17879071
Beauty of it is, I don’t have to. Billions of people will.

>>17879072
Ask the gallery bro but if I owned it i'd probably chuck it on ebay. See if you're not sure on the value of something, you can throw it on ebay where it can be found by many and the person who considers it to have the most monetary value pays that highest amount. You should check out HUMAN ACTION by LUDWIG VON MISES.

>>17879072
tell me specifically what property of the voucher makes it non accumulative, what happens to it that makes it not accumulate?

>>17879076
>Billions of people will.
how?

>>17879078
I keep saying it.
Fuck, anonymity is such a confusing plague.
You earn it for your labor. It’s got your name on it. You have to spend it within a certain timeframe. You pay for an item the amount of time it took to make with your time. It goes away, not into someone’s till. That someone is earning his or her own vouchers. It simplifies exchange and keeps it honest.

>>17879082
Well it’s in their best interest, anon. We either do this or the planet keeps heating up, both physically and metaphorically, till we either die of an extinction event or a nuclear war

>>17877785
The full value of your work is not truly known until the product you create is sold.
The employer has to bet your product will stay at as certain value when paying your salary and also even if it stays the same value your employer has to pay for a lot of other things than your salary. Any company that paid their employees exactly the value of their product would disappear in a few months.
Many companies aren't even profitable and they are oar companies that do make a profit only make a couple of percent profit.

>>17879123
Hence the superfluous “owner”, “manager”, etc. are a useless drag on the whole business model.
Off with the kings head.

>>17879137
That's not a realistic conclusion to make from my post. You are a most cause and truly don't understand how capital works.
I hope you decide to start a business that produces physical products.

>>17879042
>It’s property of accumulation is obviously built to make some artificially of a higher rank than the masses.
The property of accumulation was selected for because people could see the utility in sacrificing the present for the future.

>>17877934
kill yourself, tranny faggot

>>17879111
>You have to spend it within a certain timeframe
what if your timeframe runs out and you need something? you just starve because your labour value is just stolen from you? if youre too busy and dont get a chance to spend, once again your labour value is stolen from you in its entirety? why would anyone volunteer to be part of this when they can just make money they can spend however they want and it wont be stolen from them after an arbitrary amount of time?

also how exactly do you expect to take on large scale projects like infrastructure and defense related tasks without accumulations of wealth, and what wealth there is just magically vanishes?

>You pay for an item the amount of time it took to make with your time
this is completely and utterly nonsensical. for starters, not all all labour is equal, secondly materials have value as well as labour, thirdly how do you decide how much an hour of labour is worth? fourth, something completely useless and valueless can take ages to make . in the end prices WILL be decided by supply and demand no matter what, not and arbitrary value based on time

>It goes away, not into someone’s till.
so why would they give away goods in exchange for it?
they literally get nothing

also who is in charge of overseeing the distribution of these coupons?

>>17879111
>Well it’s in their best interest,
what the fuck gave you an idea that people inherently act in their best interest? 99% of pop culture and 99% of the problems in the world revolve around the fact that people are incapable of simply putting off instant gratification for long term gains, and there no fixing that without authoritarian intervention and large scale indoctrination and rule enforcement

>>17879111
hot weather and nuclear holocaust please :)

>>17878123
based neet

>>17876687
capitalism bad (true)

its this easy to undermine leftist movements

>>17877885
"I paid $100,000 for that machine, which I paid off with your labor very shortly thereafter, I'm entitled to continue rent seeking forever without any meaningful participation in the value-added chain - forever. I will compensate you meaningfully, you will fight for every dime."

No problem here.

>>17879315
you're literally angry because people can own things that they pay for lmao. this is mental illness. how could you possibly think takes like this will not only sell people on a revolution, but also establish some sort of functional community at the other end of that revolution

>>17876687
>Why are people who work poor and people who own rich?
>Because the people who own buy labor for less then that labor produces in value
There, the Vol. 1 explained.

>>17878150
Why are you defending these countries? You said yourself they were state capitalist countries lmao

>>17879332
I'm not here for a revolution you dolt. Nor am I a Marxist or a communist. But the rent seeking behaviors of the market at large are a serious ethical consideration. There's no rational justification for it, like many market forces it's wholly irrational and exploitative, and more generally speaking an injustice. There's nothing wrong with ownership, and there's nothing wrong with extracting value within reason, but extracting disproportionately large amounts of capital from labor is not correct and is in fact a serious aberration which has been compounded by the allowance of government intervention in markets, which cushions the many conglomerates from the emergence of any real threat through either acts of god, or competition.

What's your thesis anyways? What point are you intent on arguing?

>>17878123
What a fucking mess of a being. Why would anyone take anything from his "teachings"?

>>17879360
> There's nothing wrong with ownership
....unless someone owns something you want and feel entitled too

>>17879379
Cool, so you don't have an argument or even an axiom to propose. You're a pretty sad troll.

>>17879386
lol what in gods name are you talking about? my relpy to you was calling you out for throwing a fit about the fact that people get to own things they buy and the law says you cant just take it from them, and then you confirmed that that is indeed was what you were doing. what sort of axiom am i supposed to be proposing here? theres nothing left to argue lol

>>17877880
It’s because of maturity transformation

>>17878489
Imagine “not liking the direction the world is going” and thinking the problem is capitalism lol. Only way to come to this conclusion is by theorycelling and being a coward who wants a socially acceptable pov.

>>17877869
Yes, it's the difference in wealth between employers and employees

>>17877735
You laugh, but a lot of people disagree with this simple fact.

How many of you in here are actually members of labor unions?

>>17881166
I'm not but, why would I be? Labor unions basically just siphon money away from an already poor working class to a bureaucratic body of busybodies.

Fact is, workers don't need to join a club to strike or negotiate wages.

>>17881335
Can you show some real world examples of labor organizing without some leadership or some kind of structure by which they can direct their actions towards a common end? Unions have turned pretty gay in the past hundred years, that is true. But show me those freelance, individual workers striking and collectively negotiating.

>>17876687
Socialism: Utopian and Scientific is the official tl;dr by Engels.

>>17880753
Imagine not realizing this fact. Pathetic.

>>17879351
It’s a worthless chart for what it’s trying to convey. I am not defending tankies nor socdem capitalism. Too many variables to consider.

>>17879174
>99%
There’s a vast amount of people in the Know right now. Your pessimism just reveals more about you and the power of state propaganda
People want what is obviously best for them. Free clinics to organic foods, we know what’s best

>>17879156
It was “selected” by bully tyrants for their own aggrandizement. Geez. Read a book.

>>17879145
If this is a genuine post, it is sad. I posted a yt link ITT for a short piece by professor Richard Wolff. Watch that and learn.

>>17879163
All your questions are answered in the book. This modification to the system would fix a load of ills, but the reason we don’t do it has nothing to do with its workability and everything to do with the gut punch to the elites