Thoughts?
>>55249895
>that "personal property" amendment
top kek
is that added in from all the times people asked socialists to give up their MacBook during their anti private property campaigns?
>This communist ad brought to you by imaging software created via capitalism
Any attempt to convert me to socialism or communism will result in megadeath.
>>55250143
capitalism is taking social labor and slapping trademark on it. Everytime you get into an MRI machine should it say "brought to you by Soviet Communism" same for anything with a laser.
>>55249895
Its a bunch of bullshit. "Capitalism is essentially wasteful", while socialist-communist side means of production are controlled by the workers, people who have absolutely no incentive to make production efficient, nor does anyone else in the organization have incentive to hard, as they are all paid the same, and there is no upwards mobility.
And that sentence: "Commodities are produced because they can be sold". This is a bad thing? If something cannot be sold, it isn't needed, period
>>55250325
>This communist internet post brought to you by internet cable laid down via capitalism
>>55249895
Worst comparison I have seen in a while.
>implies the workers have all the power in communism not the centralized government
>completely negates the market forces that dictate employee pay, production, pricing, staffing etc in capitalism
>implies government dictates to business in capitalism not market, profit, board, and/or investors
>>55250143
hey, that is like criticizing the Continental army for using english powder.
Whoever tries to convince you that a massive and powerful government would voluntarily abolish itself because it recognized that it was not needed any more is either an imbecile or a psychopath.
>>55249895
I'll bite. Lets just run through the text quickly.
>capitalism is wasteful because commodities are produced because they can be sold, not because they are needed.
People buy what they need, for whatever reason it may be. Try making a useless piece of shit product and sell it. Good luck.
>Under capitalism, the means of production are controlled by the capitalists
Capitalists = People around the world who spent time and money, took risks that no one else would, to establish a successful product.
>Under both socialism and communism, the means of production are controlled by the workers
Workers beings a codeword for the political elite class, ruling the working class.
>under capitalism, technology is applied as [...] read the paragraph yourself you memefucker
There is no historical evidence that increased productivity through automation leads to unemployment in the long run. If automation should ever become a problem for the lowest skilled workers, the market regulates itself to compensate for this. To this date, automation has simply forced more people to take higher education, which is sold as a socialist exclusive in this image.
>Under capitalism, the working day is stretched [...] under socialism the working day is as short [...] under communism the working say is freely [...]
Under capitalism, the working hours hits a natural equilibrium, which benefits the market as well as the worker.
>Under capitalism, worker only earn what is required bottom line needs
They earn what their service is worth.
>Under communism, workers have complete, free, and immediate access to the abundance of socialised production.
Communism and abundance is an oxymoron.
[continued]
>technology is a substitute for the workforce
Wrong. Business always invest into both technology and workforce at the same time.
>>55249895
"ON PAPER IT WORKS"
>>55250437
>This communist internet post brought to you by internet cable laid down via capitalism
correction:
>This communist internet post brought to you by internet cable laid down by workers
>>55249895
So many facts not considered. Also the communism got their own definition wrong that that the state will eventually control everything.
>>55249895
shitty infograph oversimplifying things
also
>personal property
>private property
But but, what if my means of production is a laundry mat (home appliances). herr durr
>>55249895
Well I didn't finish reading it because I can clearly see it's biased BS.
>means of production are controlled by 'the capitalist'
Wouldn't want to say owners or investors, people might imagine those as human. More important to label them by their ideology and call them by their monster name.
>Under socialism and communism the means of production are controlled by the workers/citizens.
Yeah right. Never heard of this little invention called the state I see. A greater beast than any one capitalist, btw.
>>55250624
>>55250624
>If automation should ever become a problem for the lowest skilled workers, the market regulates itself to compensate for this.
>the market regulates itself to compensate for this.
No. Wages in the industrial world are at their lowest today since WW2, but unemployment is at the highest level. Your market isn't working properly.
>>55250744
>This communist internet post brought to you by internet cable laid down by workers
Correction
>This communist internet post brought to you by internet cable laid down workers of a private capitalist firm
>>55250624
>Under capitalism, the government has the role of easing the class struggle in favour if capital.
No, the market literally does this itself. If it didn't the workers would constantly go and strikes, or maybe even begin the "revolution". Labour unions are an example of how capitalism creates an opposite force of the market force. Interestingly, both forces seek to influence government actions.
>under socialism, the government has role of coordinating the production in the favour of the society [...]
Ideally, sure.
>Under communism, a government separate from the people is no longer necessary [...]
This is an ideological definition. Not a fucking argument.
>State capitalism - economic system in which private capitalism is modified by varying degree of government ownership or control over some aspects of the economy
Yes.
>Capitalism - any economic system in which the means of production are owned by individuals [private property exists]
HAHAHA no. Capitalism is the sum of all trade. Nothing more, nothing less. If there is not trading, there is no capitalism. Also, under AnCap ideology, private property does not exist, as the market regulates how much is too much to own.
Can't be arsed to answer the rest. 3/10 commie material.
The fact the Capitalism is based on competition and not union makes it unsustainable in the long term.
Or it will morph into something else eventually.
You cant have corporations competing against each other, filling the world with advertisements and garbage forever and ever, how could that ever last or result in something good?
>>55249895
>Associating the red rose and the sickle and hammer
Clearly, whoever wrote this is completely fucking retarded.
>>55250829
Are you completely fucking serious? On a global scale, employment has never been higher, you nationalist retard.
>he typed on his smartphone, while wearing clothes made in a nation halfway away from him on the globe.
>>55249895
So, that's why the Soviet Union was so wonderful.
Seems odd that it collapsed.
>>55250624
>People buy what they need, for whatever reason it may be. Try making a useless piece of shit product and sell it. Good luck.
an individual buys consumer products, but you can't buy things like a functional transportation system, those require collective action and resources to be created
>Capitalists = People around the world who spent time and money, took risks that no one else would, to establish a successful product.
pretty accurate definition, but not everyone can be a capitalist, it is easy for a billionaire to "risk" a million but it is impossible for a poor person to do the same.
>Workers beings a codeword for the political elite class, ruling the working class.
Are you aware there is an elite ruling class in capitalism? Switching words for your interpretation and claiming it as fact is pretty crappy debating. Here i will have a try at this
>capitalist is codeword for degeneracy promoting chosen
the rests of your green text can be pretty much refuted by
>says you
you make claims with no evidence.
>>55249895
Wow this image absolutely BTFO /pol/ corporate boot lickers
>>55250984
It hasn't.
Despite SJW shit actual communism hasn't been tried.
Because of no essential global economy, the communist states had to compete without outside economies which can essentially milk money from their arses to create production; see Nazi Germany/Imperial Japan.
So yes, actual communism hasn't been tried.
State capitalism, however has because it still exists today in china.
>>55249895
we have like 90 years of history proving this graphic wrong
theory versus tested ideologies
>>55250870
That makes no sense. If the market was driven by Unions there would be no incentive to innovate and expand businesses.
Unions just want to make what they have always made by doing what they have always done. This will create an over priced obsolete product. See US Steel industry.
There will always be a company that will innovate and modernize and the market will always respond. The heavily Unionized sectors will always lose, unless they are operating in an artificially protected environment ie communism.
It is one of the reason communist countries that ignore capitalism get left behind.
>>55251068
>communism hasn't been tried.
>[CURRENT YEAR]
>people still think communism hasn't been tried
>>55251080
lol France has a high unemployment rate and says capitalism works. topkek
>>55251138
france is a highly socialist country, even the right is soft socialism
>>55251010
>an individual buys consumer products, but you can't buy things like a functional transportation system, those require collective action and resources to be created
>collective action and resources to be created
No.
>pretty accurate definition, but not everyone can be a capitalist, it is easy for a billionaire to "risk" a million but it is impossible for a poor person to do the same.
The point being?
>Are you aware there is an elite ruling class in capitalism?
Obviously. Not much different from any other system ever employed in the history of mankind.
>the rests of your green text can be pretty much refuted by
do it then.
>you make claims with no evidence.
Take it at face value or leave it. I'm not gonna dig up evidence for the billionth time to prove you wrong.
>>55250475
More like defending Cuba and the Philippines with an aging empire. Nice try thought
The reason that communism will ALWAYS fail is that greed is a fundamental part of human nature
And that's not a bad thing either
>>55250744
>These workers laid down cable and were paid to do so via capitalism
>>55251116
It hasn't though, read marx's actual theory and the actual workings of people who dictated what communism is, communism is actually existent once automation has replaced labor, everything there is no shortage, and basically the people rule over themselves, in short the actual term of communism is eden-like anarchism.
So yes, it hasn't been tried because theoretically it won't exist for another hundred years, or even ever due to resources being limited.
>>55251068
China - Communist political system with "capitalist" economy. Nope. Not even.
Means of production owned by the state, and run by the political elite. Can be revoked at any time for any reason and passed to another. The PLA (Peoples' Liberation Army) is one of the largest corporations in the world. It directly owns "the means of production". China puts on a good show, but I've worked there. Outside the city cores it is a third-world slave plantation.
>>55251068
>communism hasn't been tried.
Look mate, if a experiment has been tried and treied again and again, over 50 fucking years+ and in every case gomunism turned into a dictatorship, and never into the rsult you WANT to get, and could, THEORETHICALLY, then that means "real" communism is unobtainable in the real world, and just results in either dictatorships, collapse, or "communism" with heavy free market influences keeping it afloat, like China, or Vietnam
pic related you turd
>>55250166
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5jvUXij7nU
>>55249895
>production is controlled by the "capitalists"
This is pure propaganda.
>>55251288
>It hasn't though,
communism is a pipe dream that will never happen, and whatever has been tried IS communism, and has been an utter failure
the communists have killed hundreds of millions of people in the name of an utopia
>>55251068
>Where ever I go, I must also shitpost
>>55251244
>The reason that communism will ALWAYS fail is that greed is a fundamental part of human nature
Moral is also a fundamental part of human nature. lrn2psychology
except that's bullshit. Every "gommunist" society has actually been a form of state capitalism and have been run by an elite bureaucracy, which determine the standards, the the means of production, and the propaganda doled out to the laborers.
>>55250057
>is that added in from all the times people asked socialists to give up their MacBook during their anti private property campaigns?
>>55251293
You dumb fuck.
They are state capitalist.
They're the literal definition of state capitalist.
>>55251365
>>55251368
Why are you people so fucking thick.
I'm actively fucking tell you that communism doesn't work accurately and I agree that communism has problems, just not for the same ignorant reasons as you.
Yet you're all bitching at me as if I'm a SJW
Fucking goddamn, it's like I'm on Tumblr.
>>55251332
The USSR practically worked for a ninety years accurately, and the only fault of it's proccess was bureaucracy, which shouldn't have even existed in the USSR but popped up anyway because people though replacing the bourgeois with practically a more "Communist" bourgeois was a intelligent idea.
It wasn't, it proved that having a small group of people leading a society isn't ever beneficial for a state.
>>55251487
Yes, and that is called state capitalism.
So practically, communism hasn't proceeded onto it's intentions.
>>55251288
>mfw this strayan shitposter https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QpC2avsGZGY
you are from Sidney or a chinese "australian" arent you?
>>55249895
Literally none of this is true. Do you think the wageslaves at the foxxcon factories control the means of production or have shorter work days?
>>55251527
>and the only fault of it's proccess was bureaucracy, which shouldn't have even existed in the USSR
Besides the millions of starved people, and millions of death people in the Gulags, and the MILLIONS who fled through the iron curtain to get away from the shitstain thats communism?
also
>shouldnt
>if
Yeah, and if my grandmother had balls, she would be my grandfather. It doesnt matter what should, would, could. What matters is what is and happens time and time again anyone tries communism. see >>55250521
You will never get your pipedream Utopia, thats not how humans work, especially not humans with power.
>>55251527
Not "State Capitalist". Correctly called "Command Economy".
Big difference there mate.
Huge difference.
Catch a flight to Shanghai, and just walk around and look for a few days, then do the same in Singapore.
Let me know how which one is truly superior.
>>55251527
It never will. Power is always a factor and will always find itself to the top. "Communism" is some anarchist's wet dream, it will never come to pass.
>>55251560
>I'm shitposting for practically saying the truth
/pol/ goddamn why do you have to be this thick
I can't go to /leftypol/, /lit/ or /hist/ because they're all fucking narcissists stuck on definitons.
Can't go to other forums because they're moderated and bureaucratic, usually blindly following ideologue.
I'm from sydney, but I'm also racist, and sexist, but I'm not ignorant either, I don't have any biases, I don't think the left is the reason behind our faults, infact marx and proudhon were both conservatives.
Nothing is simple
>>55251736
>Comparing a city state to a nation with mutliple economic capitals with differing standards
>>55251715
>Besides the millions of starved people, and millions of death people in the Gulags, and the MILLIONS who fled through the iron curtain to get away from the shitstain thats communism?
...what the fuck do yo think caused that you ignorant fuck?
That same bureaucratic government.
>You will never get your pipedream Utopia, thats not how humans work, especially not humans with power.
>Actively said I didn't want the utopia and I was against the idea
>But because I'm thinking objectively I'm somehow still a fucking stereotypical communist
Fucking christ you people.
>>55251197
How does a healthcare system or transportation system not require collective action and coordination?
You were implying that those who risks their wealth are somehow worthy of their wealth. The truth is not everyone has the same opportunity. If you are okay with that, that is great, I have to deal with idiots who claim wealth is meritocratic.
>Obviously. Not much different from any other system ever employed in the history of mankind.
if you are not part of the elite ruling class, why not overthrow it? maybe you are, but why should the poor not overthrow it, they don't have to "risk" wealth they don't have to join the communist party and join the supposed "elites".
the rest of you greentext are just statements you claim are true. where is your proof that workers are paid what their services are worth? or that automation doesn't lead to more unemployment?
hy the poor should be communist by /biz/
Capitalist argue:
>life is unfair deal with poverty and shove it up your ass
If that is the case why should the poor not rebel? If poverty is okay why is the expropriation of the bourgeoisie not okay?
Capitalist argue:
>muh natural rights, muh property is sacred, human nature
These are all concepts with not real proof.
Capitalist argue:
>humans are naturally greedy, communism relies on everyone being an angel
if humans are naturally greedy, why should the poor not play their role and revolt and be greedy? There is also the fact that laborers are not being greedy by not revolting, which means people are okay with sharing their labor.
Capitalist argue:
>Communism leads to an unelected unaccountable elite
How is that different from capitalism? Workers don't vote for their supervisors or their bosses, the power over someone's economic activity is no small deal. Workers today live under a system where they have to submit to others in order to have an income. At least in communism they auto-manage.
capitalist argue:
>capitalism has lifted millions out of poverty, and communism creates poverty
If you are poor in capitalism then capitalism has failed you and a communist revolution at least brings the hope of a better system decided by the poor revolting class.
There are literally people in this world who have nothing to lose but their chains.
>>55251527
>"Communism has never been tried!"
>people disagree because you're blatantly wrong
>"You people are so fucking thick!"
Denial of reality in real-time is very much a leftist behavioral trait.
Only National Socialism.
Heil Hitler.
>>55249895
>in capitalism everything is wrong and stupid
>in communism everybody agree and nothing bad happens ever because bad people don't exist without a government
stupid bullshit
>>55251943
But I'm not fucking saying it in the way you think I am you dumb fuck.
I'm saying by literal meaning, if you read actual economics, communism can not exist and has not existed under it's true terms.
>Y-You're just a leftist, you hate the white race, communism has been tried, wait what you want me to read communist literature?
>HELL NO, I'M NOT GOING TO EDUCATE MYSELF ON MY OPPONENTS ARGUMENT, THAT'LL DEFINITELY MAKE ME LOOK INTELLIGENT
>>55251967
Maybe we will "visit" your shit country again one day.
>>55251864
If something works, it should scale. If it cannot scale up then it does not "work". I think you just made my point that Command economies cannot scale to nation-state level without small-scale control. Hence, independent local control is better than central planning, therefore, communist state economics is a sub-optimal solution to human needs.
>>55252132
Fuck you, nigger.
>>55252096
Far from the reality from it.
Communism has "Commune" in it for a reason, it is a group, a collective, a people alike each other, what need will they have to rob and kill each other, or destroy each other's property or cause greed or grief?
If something bad does happen though, it is handled communally, if a pedophile molests a child, that pedophile would be dealt with or depending on the definiton on state, you'd still have small government to handle law and enrforcement.
>>55252154
>Ayn rand
Do you expect me to take you seriously?
It'd be like me showing communist manifesto as a example, it's fucking stupid, a limited look a economics.
Also, read this.
ate capitalism is usually described as an economic system in which commercial (i.e. for-profit) economic activity is undertaken by the state, where the means of production are organized and managed as business enterprises, including the processes of capital accumulation, wage labor, and centralized management.[1] This designation applies to economies regardless of the political aims of the state, even if the state is nominally socialist.[2] State capitalism is characterized by the dominance of state-owned business enterprises, corporatized government agencies (agencies organized along business management practices), and states that own controlling shares of publicly listed corporations. The term is also often used to describe the economic systems of socialist states,[2] and many socialists argue that the Soviet Union either did not transcend capitalism, or as a criticism of its political system, argue that it could not achieve socialism but rather established state capitalism.[2][3]
This is primarily what china operates udner.
>>55252132
>implying it won't be the other way around
>>55252105
>"My utterly pure form of communism hasn't been tried!"
>isn't the same argument as
>"Communism has never been tried!"
I guess the USA isn't a capitalist nation, either. After all, it's not textbook snowflake pure capitalism.
>>55252332
You'd be right in that context, that's a bad comparison.
>means of production are controlled by the workers
Welp, shame that communism always fails at step 1 isnt it
>>55249895
>Under Communism the means of production are controlled by the workers/citizens
But they're not
they're controlled by the government
>>55251901
>There are literally people in this world who have nothing to lose but their chains
yeah, but not in the US or Europe, or any other nation with any influence.
Look at what "poor" Americans have.
Look at Christian Weston Chandler. He never worked a day in his life and still buys Lego for thousands of dollars.
Hes a super selfish retard who lives for Sonichu.
And besides all that, he has everything he could want.
Now, look at ricefarmers in China, or Vietnam. Despite working their asses off they have shit to show for. Wealth in those countries only really rose when "communism" became "Communism light with loads of capitalism and free market trade"
Look at Krupp, Alfred https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krupp#Alfred.27s_era
>"bad evil gapitalist pig"
>his workers had better social security, pensions, housing and so on then almost everyone else in the nation at the time
Or Ford.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fordism
>Fordism is "the eponymous manufacturing system designed to spew out standardized, low-cost goods and afford its workers decent enough wages to buy them".
So yeah, people in industrialized capitalist nations have way more to loose then people in communist shitholes. But please, prove me wrong.
Show me the communistic nations with better living standards then capitalist nations.
>>55252318
we had communes back in the day. the government was far away and everything was dealt with locally.
people relied on hunting and farming to survive and went to the merchant to get colony wares.
we'll either end up with a ruthless dictator or go 200 years back in time.
>>55252407
>Cites state capitalist countries
>Denies that they aren't communist when approached
>Despite state capitalist countries essentially running average capitalism, just controlled by the state
>>55252458
I know, that isn't necessarily bad either.
I'd honestly live in that life then life in the life being controlled by government to be honest.
Comfort has made us shit people.
I'd actually love to have to fend for myself, it'd make life so..meaningful.
No doubt, it'd be tough.
But what is life without adversity?
>>55251878
I assumed when meant "collective", you mean the socialist collective. Of course it require "collective" effort and resourced. Capitalist systems can easily create this.
Also, the difference between starting a company with little money, and starting one with a billion dollars, is jealousy, not opportunity.
>if you are not part of the elite ruling class, why not overthrow it? maybe you are, but why should the poor not overthrow it, they don't have to "risk" wealth they don't have to join the communist party and join the supposed "elites".
I am rebelling. Just not with guns and force like some retards wants me to. Want to overthrow the ruling elite? Don't play their game.
>where is your proof that workers are paid what their services are worth?
This is literally inductive reasoning. If capitalists markets seek to maximize profit, there's a hurt point where employing an individual with an arbitrary set of relevant skills won't benefit the company.
People who are employed for less than their worth might be subject to coercion. This is why labour unions exist.
>automation doesn't lead to more unemployment?
This is way more difficult to answer. You have to isolate automation from market crises, war, government intervention and actions, etc. I'm literally an electrical automation engineer student, and McKinsey had an "info-night", where they presented this shit. I can't exactly dig it up. I don't care if you believe me or not, really.
>>55249895
>Socialism
>worker controls the means of production
intothetrashitgoes.mpeg
>>55252318
Dear friend, making copy/paste explanations for the failure of Communist Economics is fine in the classroom. We are talking about the effects of economic theory on the lives of people, individuals, living and breathing right now. Nothing is perfect, as we are human and infinitely fallible. That said, some things work better than others. I have been to every communist country left on earth, Including North Korea, and I can tell you from first-hand experience that China works only because it has the U.S. as a trading partner, without America as a outlet for its' production it would fail completely. It cannot exist alone.
Cuba is nice - no industry and a subsistence economy. Collapsed when the USSR died.
They survive, but as modern peasants.
Getting better there every year, but it still sucks for them, with their 2-tiered monetary system they survive via small scale trade, and tourism.
NK is hell, pure communism, and they starve in the streets. Get out of Pyongyang if you can and have a look.
Give me evil free-market capitalism any day. I am not hungry, have a nice place to live, and a job I can quit if I so choose.
We live in paradise, here in the West, you just don't have anything to compare it too.
>>55252319
We bombed the shit out of your third world country only 15 years ago, sandnigger.
>>55251244
as a sweeping statement i disagree.
Greed is big in the USA granted.
>>55252914
NK is not hell, don't make claims with no proofs
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2638213/Tourist-took-camera-inside-North-Korea-expected-really-really-sad-people-shocked-seemingly-ordinary-lives-citizens.html
>>55249895
>Communism
>stateless society
Pick one. People don't give up power willfully.
Also, we saw how incredibility inefficient communism is at determining supply and demand, you would never see droves of people starving and loads of food rotting in a capitalist society. As far as I can think that's never happened correct me if I'm wrong.
>>55253150
I have been there, walked the streets (with "guide" in tow) and seen it for my self.
Your statement made me laugh.
"Who are you going to believe? Me, or your lying eyes!"
Too damn funny.
>>55252860
>People who are employed for less than their worth might be subject to coercion
people take menial jobs because they need to feed themselves. so they might be getting paid less than their worth, also if they are getting paid what their worth, how do the stockholders make money or the organization even claim a profit.
>Of course it require "collective" effort and resourced. Capitalist systems can easily create this.
no they don't, they require a state to do this, communism is turning the state into the workers, that way the self-manage.
>I am rebelling. Just not with guns and force like some retards wants me to. Want to overthrow the ruling elite? Don't play their game.
we probably shouldn't "play their game" but the ridiculously poor should. I don't think Nicholas II thought his executioners were "playing a game"
>>55253311
did you take any pics? I could claim on the internet to have fuck your mom, but that is a meaningless statement without pictures.
>>55253489
Under strict instructions from my evil capitalist overlords not to make trouble or embarrass the company while we tried to set up a contract for "item" production at a 'Special Economic Co-Operation Zone' in the workers paradise.
>>55250143
You communicated that comment via the internet created by the government
>>55253489
So, no pics, but let me tell you, never eat dairy products in the DPRK.
>>55250437
You have no right to be capitalist because the american flag was made by a socialist
>>55253417
>people take menial jobs because they need to feed themselves. so they might be getting paid less than their worth, also if they are getting paid what their worth, how do the stockholders make money or the organization even claim a profit.
Categorically wrong. Menial jobs are always the highly repetitive low-skilled jobs. Most people can compete for the jobs at this level, and this reflects in the wages.
>how do the stockholders make money or the organization even claim a profit.
Not all turnover goes to paying workers, obviously. NO, this does not mean it then goes directly into the stockholder's or business owner's pockets.
>no they don't, they require a state to do this, communism is turning the state into the workers, that way the self-manage.
What the fuck are you? That people and companies with a mutual interest in establishing improved transportation methods cannot create fucking railways and trains? You are seriously fucking implying this?
>we probably shouldn't "play their game" but the ridiculously poor should.
Pick your battles, m8. If you don't want fight your oppressors, because you're afraid of what might await beyond the victory, then you're in no position to complain about it.
>>55250459
There's no government in communism, it's the complete elimination of capital and the state. And I ain't even a commie fag.
>>55254243
Seems like the definition of street gangs and narco-cartels.
>>55249895
Make it readable and not a giant mess and try again.
>>55253714
no pics, but don't ever kiss your mom on the lips again.
>>55253966
>That people and companies with a mutual interest in establishing improved transportation methods cannot create fucking railways and trains?
not without a state.
>Not all turnover goes to paying workers, obviously. NO, this does not mean it then goes directly into the stockholder's or business owner's pockets.
you are right, not all turnover goes to the pockets of the workers, so that means they are not getting paid their worth.
>Categorically wrong. Menial jobs are always the highly repetitive low-skilled jobs. Most people can compete for the jobs at this level, and this reflects in the wages.
you forget that some high-skilled workers are not able to get high-skilled jobs and have to take menial jobs.
>Pick your battles, m8. If you don't want fight your oppressors, because you're afraid of what might await beyond the victory
never implied I was afraid of what is "beyond the victory"
>>55254336
Nice. Let the grown-ups talk. /b/ is that way
<======
>>55254539
>not without a state.
The "WHAT ABOUT ROADS" argument all over again.
>you are right, not all turnover goes to the pockets of the workers, so that means they are not getting paid their worth.
Take econ 101 please.
>you forget that some high-skilled workers are not able to get high-skilled jobs and have to take menial jobs.
Literally a meaningless sentence. Being highly skilled at something does not earn you a high skilled job. If I'm highly skilled at X, but the market needs Y, Z, K, and very very little X, then it's bad fucking luck.
>never implied I was afraid of what is "beyond the victory"
I never implied you were.
>>55250057
le ebin hipster socialist meme XDDDD
>>55250143
>>55250437
>>55250833
This morning I was awoken by my alarm clock powered by the electricity generated by the public power monopoly regulated by the US department of energy...
>the first sentence of the Capitalism paragraph is already wrong
don't have to read the rest
>>55254807
you claimed workers are paid there worth but they clearly aren't. saying take econ 101 is like responding with read capital volume 1-3. that is not a counterpoint.
the roads argument is right and you haven't disproven it.
Are you saying a highly skilled electrical engineer working at mcdonalds is worth the same as a highschool dropout workign at mcdonalds?
Why should any of these people be denied a living wage, they provide value to society through labor.
>>55250984
That image is essentially pointless. So what if a certain kind of socialism hasn't been tried? What's inherent about socialism that makes it in all shapes or forms inevitably violent?
>inb4 human nature
The idea that socialism involves giving everything to an aloof, omnipotent government with the naive hope that it'll fix everything is baseless. Nothing of the sort was mentioned in Marx's work, and there are countless factions of socialism that explicitly reject such a system. The major systems that accept it are, conveniently, the only socialist systems that anti-socialists want to discuss, baselessly denying that any other kind is possible.
>>55250459
>what is Titoism
>what is market socialism
>what is anarchist socialism
>>55250521
Especially considering that said omnipotent government probably won't exist in the first place.
>>55255085
Built and operated by a private corporation.
>>55250624
>workers=political elite
Nice strawman.
Saying that workers own the means of production means that THE WORKERS OWN THE MEANS OF PRODUCTION. It's not a carte blanche for accusations of bureaucratic worship.
>>55250803
>le totalitarianism is essential to socialism hurr
>no you idiot the workers own the means of production
>I know your dirty rotten socialist tricks ya pinko faggot! You mean that the state takes everything and claims to operate for the workers!
>Actually no, I meant that the workers own the means of production. Stop this straw man.
>Don't go tryin' ta trick me ya sneaky kike pinko! Public ownership ALWAYS and INEVITABLY means that the government magically owns the entire society and will inevitably cause mass starvation and genocide!!11!!!
Typical argument between socialist and anti-socialist.
>>55253710
The internet wasn't created by the government. The government provided some of the research, but mostly just on a very basic level. The vast majority of later research and the building of the infrastructure was by private capital.
>>55255196
>you claimed workers are paid there worth but they clearly aren't
They clearly are though.
>the roads argument is right and you haven't disproven it.
It isn't. Pic related.
>Are you saying a highly skilled electrical engineer working at mcdonalds is worth the same as a highschool dropout workign at mcdonalds?
You don't need fucking EE skills to flip burgers, you dense fucker.
>Why should any of these people be denied a living wage, they provide value to society through labor.
>a living wage
They shouldn't, but there's a finite number of jobs.
>>55255531
But capitalism is a system where the means of production are owned by evil oligarchs with the sole purpose of oppressing the working class, right? :^)
>>55250842
>capitalism is all trade
Then I guess the Ukraine Free Territory and the first human gift economies were capitalist.
>>55255387
Not terribly interested in the Marxist Dialectic, I have always seen that as a self-serving circle jerk.
The Marxist theory of Value is complete bullshit, and is the inherent flaw in his entire thesis.
If your theory is flawed, your thesis is pointless, as it will not create the predicted outcome.
Game, set, match, Adam Smith.
>>55251244
>greed is a fundamental part of human nature
>So fuck the mountains of evidence that suggest otherwise! Let's encourage greed to rule over us! Greed is good!
>>55250624
>Try making a useless piece of shit product and sell it. Good luck.
Hah. I buy things all the time that are supposed to do something and they end up breaking really quickly or not working as effectively as I thought they would. There's a lot of capitalist products which are simply shit. Planned obsolescence is a thing, too.
I'm not against capitalism, though.
>>55251288
Underrated post
>>55251430
Ssshhh don't disrupt their fantasy world...
>>55251490
Great post. Haven't seen Stallmanposting here in a while.
>>55249895
>the means of production are controlled by the workers/citizens under socialism and communism
my fucking sides
>>55251571
>China
>communist
>>55249895
Capitalist Countries
>USA
>Canada
>UK
>Germany
>France
>Japan
>Literally any 1st world country
Communist Countries
>North Korea
>Vietnam
>Cuba
>Laos
>China
Wow! I've never realized how much better communism is than capitalism. Get off the internet Bernie Sanders.
>>55251288
But if we automate everything the robots will be owned by a select few. How would that achieve capitalism?
A lot of jobs gonna disappear and a lot of new not yet existent jobs will appear, there will be competition to create faster and cheaper robots etc.
You cannot automate all the jobs unless you can create a fully functioning AI in which case humanity will probably either die out due to a robot uprising or we'll create space technology sufficient for space colonization because AI's will supercharge particle research.
>>55255855
fact: if you trade, you're engaging in capitalism.
>>55255873
I'm aware the market is not a flawless abstraction. There will always be people trying to exploit a given system. Anyway, I'm not AnCap, and do believe companies practicing planned obsolescence should be fucked over through consumer protection initiatives.
>>55251715
>>55251736
It's already been established ten times over that most communists don't want to establish a China-esque system.
>>55252389
Tired straw man.
>>55252387
In that case it hasn't been tried then.
>>55255873
>Hah. I buy things all the time that are supposed to do something and they end up breaking really quickly or not working as effectively as I thought they would. There's a lot of capitalist products which are simply shit.
True. Do you buy that product again? do you have a choice? Is there a choice?
Or do you run the risk of the gulag for buying products that are not state approved?
Planned obsolescence is a thing, too.
>I'm not against capitalism, though.
True. But with free markets and international trade we can take our money anywhere, and give it to whomever we choose, not just the 'Red Banner Lenin Progress Factory Number 3".
>>55249895
>capitalism is wasteful
>implying socialism and communism are not wasteful
Kek yeah right
>>55252407
>>55249895
>>55250716
Everything works good on paper because its so easy to change variables around. However, in society its not that simple but we all know this already.
I am trying to figure out how the ideal Libertarian society would be put on paper:
>A society with minimal taxation.
>Legalized Hemp market would solve the oil crisis because weed is exactly that, a weed that can be grown anywhere, HELLO even MEXICO can grow it.
>Legalized Hemp would also reduce plastic landfills as Hemp products are all biodegradable.
>End the Drug War and law enforcement costs go down tremendously and Natural selection would kill all the stupid hard-core drug addicts that don't want to seek help.
>No government subsidies, only a free market trade.
>No government hand-picked strawman to run for president under the False left-right paradigm.
>Only taxed for basic military defense purposes and Social services for the needy (But the social services have a realistic filter to be legible so the ghetto scum cannot leech the system.)
How would we as a society be able to cope without government assistance helping to poor folk that refuse to work even when they are physically able to do so.
These disabled folk in the ghettos are mentally disabled, not physically disabled.
>Welfare
>SSI
>Disability
>Free Healthcare to disabled folk
They cry chronic back pain then get paid to live. They end up working side jobs just to afford 40's and ganja and then trade their food stamps for more drugs.
>>55252914
Actually Cuba has some of the best healthcare and life expectancy in the region IIRC
>>55249895
I would putt y'all beta 26 old kisless virgin, chubby furry basement faggots back to the USSR or to an ex Eastern Block country around 1950-1960 and you could experience how your naive retarded ideologies created by your mind forced to think on something twisted and anti-current world order mindset, for you have nothing to do, due to being psycho and sochipaths and having 0 social, personal and sex life and blaming the world and not yoruself for it, seeing retarded conspiracies and idiotic mindsets everywhere.
>>55256167
Yet almost all the communist revolutions turned into something like this.
The big question of even theoretical communist systems is how you prevent a select few to grab the power and control the police, the army etc.
Because this is what happened in every Easter Euro countries, what happened in China and Vietnam and Cambodia etc.
This is what always happens.
The Old Party members get good positions, get the wealth of the former aristocracy or 1%, live in huge ass houses and drive imported cars, people who really want communism either get pushed out of power or get imprisoned/executed if they don't stay silent, and eventually a handul of party functionaries grab all the power and stay in power for decades, which is essentially just another dictatorship.
This is not a theoretical possibily, this is the ONLY way how communism ever turned out so far.
In the end for the average worker communism only resulted in less social mobility and less wealth.
A select few lived like kings and the nobility.
So the question is, how'd you prevent this from happening?
>>55249895
>means of production controlled by the workers/citizens
Bullshit, it's controlled by the aristocrats.
>>55253229
>capitalism doesn't have people starving and loads of food rotting
You just described two massive problems facing the modern capitalist world.
>>55253714
Don't do it in India either. Also dairy is probably uncommon in the DPRK because most people there are intolerant of lactose.
>>55256298
>Jusoslavia
>democracy
Tito had private islands and lived like a fucking KING. So much for muh equality.
>>55249895
>Capitalism is wasteful. Goods are produced because they are sold, not because they are needed.
>People buy things not because they need them, but just for lolz to keep the system working
This is bait, right?
>>55256206
But it has you dumb fuck. A country try's then human nature kicks in and derails it. There you've been told now cut the idealism over reality shit.
>>55255819
The theory of value that Marx proposed was heavily influenced by Adam Smith.
>>55251068
True capitalism hasn't been tried either.
Lets be real, faggots.
Nothing else matters but realpolitik.
>>55256642
The 1% controls everything. But THAT IS OKAY because
they will all go crazy from lack of touch with reality soon enough.
>>55255726
>They clearly are though.
you haven't proven it, i have proven what i have said, if the workers were paid there worth than a corporation could not claim a profit and stakeholders receive dividends.
>You don't need fucking EE skills to flip burgers, you dense fucker.
you didn't answer the question, I will ask again.
Are you saying a highly skilled electrical engineer working at mcdonalds is worth the same as a highschool dropout workign at mcdonalds?
>They shouldn't, but there's a finite number of jobs.
you say not everyone should get a living wage even f they provide value and have a job. and those who can't get a job should just get fucked.
Why should those people support such a system? one where even if they get a job they are not being paid what labor they are contributing to production.
>>55255989
Capitalist countries
>China
>Russia
>India
>Indonesia
>the USA
>Poland
>South Africa
Mixed/socialist/social democratic countries
>France
>UK
>Denmark
>Norway
>Iceland
>Finland
>Sweden
>Germany
>Austria
>Spain
>almost all of the most developed countries
Existing communist states
>none (communist state is an oxymoron)
FTFY
>>55249895
>communism and socialism
>it
>just
>fucking works
Send who made this image to the gulag for never reading a fucking history book.
But I'll throw a bone and say capitalism isn't perfect either.
>>55256751
>china
>capitalist
http://blogs.worldbank.org/eastasiapacific/state-owned-enterprises-in-china-how-big-are-they
"The Second National Economic Census conducted in 2008 reveals that of all the 208 trillion RMB total assets of the secondary and tertiary sectors (industrial and service sectors), 63 trillion – or 30 percent of total – was held by SOEs. (SOEs here correspond to state sole funded corporations and enterprises with the state as the biggest share holder.) Meanwhile, in terms of enterprise number, there were 154,000 SOEs at the end of 2008, only accounting for 3.1 percent of the total enterprise number. Hence, the big picture is clear: SOEs control a substantial part of total enterprise assets in China despite the fact that their total number is marginal. As a corollary of this observation it follows that the average size of SOEs is much bigger than that of non-SOEs. This is indeed the case. In terms of average assets, SOEs are equal to 13.4 times of non-SOEs."
>>55256358
This is very, very, true. They don't have much, but Castro realized knowledge is wealth, and healthy populations are good - economically and politically. If they could just figure out consumer economics they would be rich as kings. It would be like having Hawaii 90 miles off Miami.
Google "Hemingway Marina" and tell me how much you would pay to live there.
Pro-tip, dont try yet, not for sale. Used as temporary housing for people in Cuba for medical treatment.
>>55256525
Ha! Try again.
Labour theory of Value is totally insane.
Smith was on to the idea of Value-add long before it was cool.
>>55255085
Unless you live in Nebraska where Power is owned by the state and is the third cheapest in the nation.
>>55257156
They also have the only State-owned bank. This is what you should think long and hard about.
Seriously.
Not kidding.
This is an important plot-point in the story of the American experience on this continent.
>>55256418
People being hungry are not the same as starving
>>55257340
The Bank of North Dakota is state owned as well
>>55257425
People are starving in African countries right now, and these countries are even more Capitalist in policy structure than the West because otherwise the IMF won't give them their development aid.
But we can pretend the world stops at the equator if you want, Britkek.
>>55256475
He didn't exactly live like a king. Yeah he was wealthy but he didn't have as much influence as say, the Rockefellers.
>>55249895
To me it reads like a creationist trying to explain evolution. It's the Hayekian thing: If they understood economics then they wouldn't be socialists. Also they wouldn't be Keynesians, Monetarists, Communists, Fascists, yada yada.
>>55249895
What a fucking load of propaganda this shit is.
History speaks better than idealized notions.
