Two questions Holla Forums

Two questions Holla Forums

1)How does housing work in socialism Holla Forums? Doesn't socialism remove private property? Explain to me.

2) And can an individual be a business owner in socialism?

1) Private property is expropriated; personal property, i.e. a worker's permanent domicile, is not affected

2) There will be managerial positions which perform similar labor to a business owner today, but the wealth generated by the business will be owned in common by the workers

1) Socialists care about the means of production, not your house.

2) You can't. You might be able to take a management position, but the means of production (and distribution) will be owned by the workers.

Private property is not your personal belongings, it's the property used to generate economic production. Factories, machines, farmland, that kinda stuff. But the capitalists like to make you think that the communists are coming to steal your stuff, so this sort of misinformation prevails.

Private property under socialism still uses an older definition. Private property are things that are owned by people not for their own use, but to the expropriation, taxation or exploitation of others, such as factories, roads, apartment buildings etc.

There are different from personal property, which is property used for personal things, not to make money or rent to others. It is also different from public property, which is property held in common by society, often via a body of governance.

Houses are for personal use, and thus will be personal property, and society may themselves decide how to manage this, either by having it simply as personal property. By having it be owned by its inhabitants until they move out, which will return it to the local housing comitee. By having designated temporary houses for people who do not wish to live somewhere for longer periods of time and thus warrant ownership and all that comes with it (IE people who need to move somewhere for a year to work), which can be managed by a group of workers who maintain and distribute these houses. Use your imagination and you can think of a solution for any situation.

No. Since the whole point of socialism is to abolish private property, you cannot own a business. You can still start and manage one though, its just not your property and thus you are not a miniature Stalin within its perimeters.

So why would you ever do it? Being a boss I mean. Those men lose hair or go gray pretty quickly. Someone would imagine being a boss is a full time job.

What if all communisms went to shit or never even started because of suppression of these idea men (business starters, innovators, inventors, etc)?

All you are going to achieve is forcing means of production people to just go underground. Produce for themselves. Make a network between them and only them.

No one's gonna invest time, effort, money, blood, sweat and tears to start a factory out of scratch, just to have a violent mob of communists take it. Industrialists are just gonna go full automation and let ungrateful rabble starve since they cant do anything on their own.

Our society is being ran by like 2% of people with any essential technical education, everyone else is just… kinda there. We could do just fine without 90% of the population. I have worked in a powerplant, and my best friend works at car manufacturing plant. I'd know the inside of these things.

0/10 bait, >>>Holla Forums

My friend, this is the textbook definition of capitalism

i was gonna say this wasn't bait but then you really went off the deep end

If a man only wishes to perform his work on the condition of the exploitation of others' labor, he is a parasite.


I would love to see how quickly an underground society of CEOs collapses in the absence of labour to explout.

The people who invent the products and design them are rarely CEO's, because being CEO requires organisational and budgeting scale, as well as knowing about statistics and market forces.

More often than not, the CEO is either someone hired by the owner to be CEO or put there by the venture capitalist who owns them, and the inventor does his job of inventing.

Creative people rarely make good CEO's (in the current bussiness cut throat culture) and rarely want to be one, they just want to do what they like to while keeping their veto, while someone else takes care of the shitty parts like human resources and sales numbers.


First of all, why wouldn't they make something they want to make? The would get monetary support from society, won't have to run financial risk and thus starting a bussiness will be much easier. Second of all, no "violent mob of ebil gommies gonna take it". You never owned it to begin with under communism or socialism.

Damn dude you are seriously retarded. if you kill 90% of the population you suddenly also don't need to produce 90% of the shit you make, so you can keep killing 90% until just one person is left.

What others? If I start myself a factory, somewhere innawoods and put some woodland camo netting all over it, what "others" are you talking about.
Low skill laborers are not even needed. Low skill labor exists AS A CHARITY. No one actually needs these people.
Less people = more resources. You dont HAVE to produce for other people. You CAN JUST MAKE THINGS FOR YOURSELF.


Y'all just keep demanding more than you are worth, and they are gonna release the virus or some shit. And ALL THE DOCTORS ARE GONNA BE THE TEAM FEW.

t. American

China does rule the world you fucking idiot, it litterally owns america.

No I swear all the industrialists and doctors and useful people in general, all 2-3% of population of them, are all just gonna BUILD A FUCKING ISLAND on some unmapped ocean (we have more detailed cartography of the fucking moon than we have of our own waters) and just let everyone else go to shit.

This is human behavior 101. South Africa went to total absolute utter fucking shit when the whites ran out. Zimbabwe used to be a prosperous nation of Rhodesia before the rabble turned into, well, ZIMBABWE.
Favela doctors and engineers in Brazil evacuate the fuck out with a helicopter THE SECOND THEY TOUCH THEIR DEGREE.

No one's gonna just sit there and take all the demands a violent mob of communists throws at them if they posses an actual fucking skill to build a thing.

You dropped your flag

fuck off ayn rand


No one really expects arguments from the leftist kiddies who are only good at dying their hair blue, not paying any taxes, not running any businesses, not believing that private sector funds their existence, but just post after post after post after post of insults is absurd.
Insults are not changing reality.
Daddy government has needs of his own. And you are not his biological child. It feels no love towards you, it has no moral obligation to keep you clothed and fed.

You're actually sort of right here: There is nothing in principle stopping the bourgeoisie from establishing a Communism of the Rich and leaving everyone else to rot. Such a society could conceivably have near-complete automation of production, no private property, no money, and no jobs, and yet still leave the vast majority of the world's population excluded.

Pffft. Good luck and good riddance.


I hoped I wouldn't see this argument again in the near future. :(

So? We'll have all the great machinery that powers modern life, some black market of cottage industry of porkies refusing to give up the old ways will be no more a threat to us at that point than the vestigial nobility is a threat to capitalism now.

They have never done such a thing. Capitalists invest capital in factories, they don't actually build them. In communism, the class that actually built the factory will own it, and the function of the capitalist will be gone.

We'll just take over the automated factories and put them to public use, then. We don't care about muh private property rights.

No. If you're referring to the capitalist class, they do exactly jack shit except shuffle paper around, if that. If you're talking about engineers, engineers are workers and would own in the factory, something they don't do under present conditions.

I don't know if this is b8, but if absolutely nothing else capitalism would collapse without a large consumer base to sustain it. The loss of 90% of the population would cause an irreversible capitalist collapse.

Yeah, I have a job too. Apparently the experience of work hasn't shown you that upper management basically does jack shit.

Or maybe you're STEM and you've contracted that condition where you fancy yourself some sort of god-man rather than just another wage earner maximizing Porky's profits.

Fuck's sake you retard, can you not be arsed to read the first 5 pages of the Communist Manifesto?

Thank you. A communist that sees the light.

So tell me, why are you not working hard toward becoming a doctor/engineer? I know sure as hell I am. I got back from a 7 hours lecture today, and I didnt even like it. I do it all because I know that this is how all the good things in life happen.
Hospitals, factories, modern agriculture, modern medicine, modern machinery, most of the people never had any fun with those. Most of my colleagues now dont have any fun. They all do it because someone has to, and no one else is.

I sincerely believe that working hard is one of the most important things in this life. Hard work is how all the good things happened. All those satellites, buildings that touch skies, and airplanes that can carry elephants. Hell, I cant even understand half of those things. Just like half of the people who built all those, cant understand the things I am studying. But both I and them know that

I'm a PhD student.

These are the sorts of people that call communism 'unrealistic.'

Because I already am one you fucking retard.

You will be working a wage job for the rich ruling class (who are not engineers, by the way), just like 99% of the people who get STEM PhD's.

I don't know but I would try to get a job as one of them groundskeepers or, whats the word, guy who takes care of the central heating boiler, changes lightbulbs and such. Warm indoor job with plenty of free time to read, entertain guests, play chess etc.

All of the most successful jobs are being ran by engineers themselves who started it. Facebook, Google, Microsoft, General Motors, General Electric, Texas Instruments, Toshiba, Sony.
All ran by engineers. Engineers are "the porky" and the worker. And they dont need you.
They are going to leave, AND take their stuff WITH THEM. And you wont know how to rebuild any of it. Because you dont have any useful skills. Or you'd be with them in the first place.
Less consumers = more resources for me. Why do I have to make a chair for you? Cant I just make it for myself????

This is why they are going to tax robots comrade. There will be no uppity faggots living of the global supply chain.

Nah its going to be the people who can incentivise the people with the most guns to do what they say.

all of those companies have workers
who will buy your product without consumers?

We're reaching levels of self righteousness that shouldn't even be possible.

Doctors and engineers aren't the only worthwhile occupations you spergermeister and you aren't morally superior because you get a fancy suffix beside your name.

Wew lad.

Not getting into the fact that creating your own factory all by yourself would be next to impossible, you'd have to get massive amounts of resources shipped to that location just to build it, a constant input supply for your factory and a way of packaging and shipping finished goods to their intended consumers, both of which require regular and conspicuous contact with the outside world.

This isn't Factorio.

They do the bulk of the work. Yes, machines can do it too, and we support that. It will mean less work for the rest of us.

That's not how capitalism works. Capitalism is the process of creating goods for sale on the market to generate a profit and reproduce capital. You don't build factories for personal use. A hermit has no need for factories.

We know and fully support this. It's a necessary step for the creation of communism.

The people who make the profits aren't the farmers and engineers. They're the private capitalist who profits from their labor.

And capitalism collapses without a consumer base.

Historical necessity towards communism proved right, once again.

But seriously, even though OP is just making fun of this, workers "are" payed to consume, to work, to produce surplus value, etc. If full automation kicks in, workers have lost their value. Why employ, feed or care for them, if they are not necessary for production.

It's therefore in my interest to support proletarian communism, instead of hoping to be petite-bourgeois enough to survive.

If we are talking about bourgeois communism, I should rather want to be a part of the bourgeois (i.e. owner). Being an engineer or a doctor will just make me a slave.

No. Most executives don't have engineering degrees.

No. Those are all publicly traded companies, they're owned by the stockholders and run by the board of directors the stockholders elect. For a person so gung-ho about capitalism, you don't seem to understand how corporate hierarchies are actually organized. The engineers are just workers maximizing value for the stockholders and ensuring the executives on the board of directors get themselves a nice big fat bonus.

They're going to take a whole factory with them? What, just put it in the back of the pickup?

And neither would the people taking it. The capitalists don't know how to build a factory nor would their engineers, if they managed to keep them, because the engineers that run a factory aren't the same as the ones that build it.

I do find it hilarious how little you understand about capitalism. Capitalism cannot function without a market. Your factories would never be built because there would be no reason for mass production. Even if you could just load a factory into the back of your truck, it would lie dormant wherever you put it until it collapsed into dust. Capitalism needs a market and consumers are what creates that market.

Yes, but you don't need a chair factory just to make yourself a single chair.

So how come socialists never get together and get themselves some means of production?

Because they belive workers coop are of the devil

We did plenty of time.

But we do.

That's what we've been doing this whole time. That is, arguably, the purpose of this board.

k but why did it go to shit every / every time?
if you keep doing something, and it doesnt work….. shouldnt you come up with something better?

also, from my point of view, all this board does is critique of stalinists, tankies and nazbols + mental mastrubation, while stalinists, tankies and nazbols were the only ones to actually hold any ground out of all of you

Yes, he had technocrat flag last time he was here, but he is just regular fascist.

Lelelel polyp, even we mutualists have a better record

If capitalism keeps going to shit time and time again so much so that revolutionairy movements seeking to abolish it spring up and succeed time and time again, why don't you keep trying to force your obviously not working system to work?

It didn't go to shit. Yes, it collapsed in the case of the USSR and the Warsaw Pact, but you should remember that the Soviets took the still largely feudal Russian Empire and transformed it into an industrial powerhouse to rival the United States, despite two world wars, in a matter of three decades. The only other economic miracle of that scale was China, also run by a communist party (albeit one that went very, very revisionist)

kek, if capitalism is bad, why does the whole world want to come to the west to be oppressed? why are none of these neon hair trendy urban hipsters moving to best korea or even that market behemoth china?

no one's actually complaining against capitalism, not in any revolutionary sense, it's just mostly a bunch of kids who wanna feel smart that kicks trashcans and does some online mental masturbation that they cant even test if its objectively right or wrong

Sure man, the phillipines, south america, india, syria or many other countries outside of the burger sphere of influence do not exist right?

well my knowledge of history is deeply flawed, but from what I remember it was actually tzarist russia that felt really threatened by other imperial armies that were now using these new super effective high tech railway systems and whatnot, so they started hyper reforms
china also followed something similar when they saw what industrialized imperial japan was doing all over the place, and what industrialized westerners did

not denying that people always want the best thing, just saying it could be that fear of the neighbor also plays a part in that

Kid, it's very clear you don't know anything. Look up the Paris Commune and Revolutionary Catalonia. They were both ACTUAL socialist places (unlike those tankie nations), and were successful. They only failed, because war was waged on them.

I dunno, user, it's a mystery.

The mass industrialization programs didn't start under the Tzar or Chiang Kai-shek, they started after the communists took over.

you'd think that you'd learn something from it, eh?


Because the US has a higher standard of living…which it sustains through imperialist ventures. What the fuck do you think the Iraq War was for?.They come here, because their country was ruined by the US.

What the fuck is your argument…? They had a militia force. Are you arguing might = right?

We build houses. People live in them.

Yes it does.

No since socialism removes private property. There are no businesses in socialism.

who is we?

Construction workers.