where do you go from there
i think it's safe to say that anyone who isn't part of the 1% is beyond fucked alive. time to accept defeat and git rich
where do you go from there
Once human labor is obsolete capitalism is dead.
pay a visit to my good ol' friend, escapism
also, .pdf is related
whatever i don't want to get in another equivocation battle. the world is guaranteed to be largely fucked by 2050 what is the plan
How do you even determine that? Once Cuba and North Korea fall?
Does that mean that in 1910 Capitalism had won because there were no socialist states around?
Communism is innevitable even if it happens between 10 thousand people on spaceship after Earth gets thrashed.
inb4 pol tries to anarchism to judaism
And this is where you run afoul of reality. Capitalism requires a mass consumer base to function. Automation is being advanced in mass production, not in the luxury boutiques the rich use. In order for their investments in mass production to come through, you need a mass consumer base.
This is one of the contradictions of capitalism. Capitalists are pushed to automate, but automation hurts capitalism as a system.
The rich don't even want to pay for the existing welfare states, how the fuck are they going to pay out huge amounts to give people a big check for nothing?
In fact, most of the models of UBI come with the little caveat that the rest of the welfare state is removed and people only get their little pittance from the government as a social safety net (and the UBI is considerably less than what they would get from existing social services) so capitalism is still fucking itself by squeezing the consumer.
I can't justify limiting my own ability just so some Capitalist supporters can not be affected by Capitalism. Might as well enjoy it for myself. Why should I resist becoming a Capitalist? This is now an ethics debate thread.
literally impossible. do you not see where the world is going? even in the present day China has enough opposition suppression to prevent any notable uprising in an instant. note that:
1. all of your money, and therefore your means of revolt are spoon fed to you via UBI
2. all of said money is traced by the state,and therefore the rich
3. everything you do is monitored, likely several times more efficiently than it is today
4. technologically enhanced policing means that near anyone can be forcefully be put down quickly
5. because all money comed from said plutocrats, an economic propaganda campaign of literally "biting the hand" among the less angry
therefore, UBI (aka being spoon fed money by the ultra rich)
you answered your own question literally one line above this one
don't see how the last line is relevant
Where do they get that money?
How are you doing tonight?
I am okay. Dont really like Stirner and there aren't any good threads.
start liking stirner
what are: drivers licences
stirner is unironically a shitter and "ethical egoism" is retarded. his best contribution is the word "spook" which can be appropriated usefully.
something that is sooned to be banned without much public resistance because automated cars are exponentially safer . combine that with the $$$network of things$$$ and you have a globally interconnected network of vehicles that can be dictated by anyone with the privelages
As in, most UBI schemes are just more neoliberalism, a way of dismantling the welfare state with the promise of free money to everyone. In the end, it's less money in the hands of the consumer because all social services will be gone save for the UBI. Second, the rich don't want to pay for the existing welfare state and they won't want to pay for UBI. It's not a permanent solution, it's just another step in neoliberalism. UBI will either be funded through debt (thus making it another bubble that will burst leading to another capitalist collapse) or through taxes, in which case you can look forward to UBI being constantly slashed, where we wind up right back at the problem of consumers not having enough money to support capitalism again.
The logic of capitalism relies on consumers getting money in a very specific way, by selling their labor. Consumers no longer being able to sell their labor fucks capitalism up and it cannot function, shit like UBI is nothing more than a temporary makeshift to keep a flagging capitalism afloat, but without a real permanent solution shit like UBI will be little more than capitalism's last ditch attempt to save itself which it will then do everything to undermine because that's how a profit-driven system works.
We've already seen how this plays out. The welfare state was supposed to be capitalism's answer to its contradictions and it's being gutted before our very eyes and the problems that we saw with the Industrial Revolution are making a big comeback. This new iteration of welfare state isn't going to undo the contradictions that gutted the old iteration of welfare state. The rich might pay us off for a time, but the drive for ever greater profits will causes them to want to pay less and less until consumers can no longer support them. It's the same old merry-go-round you see today. Capitalism is doomed to collapse.
His philosophy is lame and I can't be fucked to read his book because all his followers are edgy and I'm tired of seeing shitty Zizek "everything is ideology lel" and "nothing is important read nietzche". It's boring and uninteresting; what do I take away from these philosophies? Nothing, the conversation about them is pointless, to the Zizek fag we're both already wrong, to the Stirnerite there is no philosophy to be had, and the Nihilism fag thought the conversation was pointless before it started.
I do enjoy the concept of spooks. Egoism is too general for me. Maybe I need to read.
His point is that not being able to drive around without state approval is already a thing, it's called a drivers licence.
Self driving cars are inevitably going to be pushed on us in subscription services. We'll be seeing ads telling us how owning a car is an inconvenience while cute ukulele and glockenspiel music plays in the background within 10 years. Self driving car developers are NOT your friends.
That's not very dialectical, comrade.
i understand it's current proposed use in being there to replace welfare and to decrease the amount of money they have to pay
soooo… what of non-laboring consumers. heirs, traders, bankers, etc.? they consume just fine with nothing more than money being handed to them. I don't se any justification for the claim that labor must be the source of income in capitalism… mostly because that isn't even true today.
but that law is still breakable. it won't be in the future,
it is very rude to derail my cyberpunk hampster state thread please stop
On the contrary, such a state of affairs only validates it.
Those are the bourgeoisie. Not everyone can be bourgeois and the bourgeois class cannot support capitalism all by itself. It needs a mass consumer base of proles.
Did you seriously make this thread wanting a conversation?
Yes it is, (sort of). The existence of a class who gets money without labor doesn't defeat that idea. They are just traders. Their money was given to them, they will then buy to live, and more money will be made and given to them or they will sell something. Bankers and heirs are really only a proxy for labor.
But they aren't bourgeois, they don't own any means, Bankers are just traders, and heirs may make money from the bourgeois.
Bourgeoisie aren't just factory owners, they're people who manage capital, which those people most certainly are.
inb4 FBI. In this position I would probably kill someone. Politicians and lobbyists and everyone fucking else just go to some organized rally and I Christopher Walken in the Dead Zone as many as I possibly can. Only I don't miss.
But this wouldn't invalidate Marx, quite the opposite.
Either that or I drive a car into them or their homes. Shooting is behind the times. Anarchists used to use nail bombs as well, doesn't sound like too much of a problem.
I really don't believe those people are Bourgeoisie. They function exactly as workers who work at trading. They are owned by "bankers" that don't work/work to advance capital. I guess you could argue that they are just bourgeois who are owning the money of proletarian as means but that still doesn't make sense. They are just buyers/sellers who are hidden behind interest and people making deposits/withdrawals at different times. I would say bankers are an edge case of Capitalism. The people who own the money they shift around are totally Bourgeoisie, but the actual bankers themselves? Don't think so.
If all else fails, and somehow you come up with an excuse where oh in the future this wouldn't happen this can't be possible.
I just get into one of these stupid fucking posh events, hand shake the man I plan on, someone with the most ties and the most money. Pull him in and bite his nose off.
As long as I bring personal harm to a billionaire in this situation, I think if I got shot I'd go out smiling. Having a great time.
"proles will rise up" *proles cease to exist before any uprising succeeds*
not really but semantics
once again: why?
exactly. capitalism operates on nothing more than the circulation of currency. labor just happens to be a part of that circulation right now, but it doesn't have to be
tbh if i'm not a plutocrat i'd probably try to launch some nihlistic terrorist org for the lulz and wait to be killed or brainwashed
They make money by managing capital. Bankers make money by essentially demanding a cut of surplus value from the business owners they lend to. Traders simply trade in surplus value hoping to get a bigger cut of it and so on. They're basically the vultures of capital. They're bourgeois because they make their wealth through extraction of surplus value, even if they don't directly do the extraction themselves.
Not only do the billionaires deserve to have acid splashed in their face in the future, but you do in the present for making such a shitty thread
i'd appreciate it if you weren't rude, thanks
Jump into a trash compactor, douse yourself in gasoline, then set yourself on fire.
I really think these guys are edge cases that fit into the system strangely. Traders aren't necessarily trying to access surplus value. For example, I make a chair, whatever I sell it as is full value. If I sell it to someone who then sells it at a higher price, there is no value being stolen. It's just a function of Capitalism as value isn't absolute.
Bankers aren't necessarily accessing surplus value. If I take out a loan, they invest in me and I pay them back, and they are paid extra for giving me money. They exist in a strange place, they basically traded me money, in exchange for more money later. They are a sort of limbo IMO.
The "non-laborers" get their wealth through property. Proletarians don't have any property by definition.
The system still collapses. We've already seen what happens to the welfare state. Capitslism is doomed to collapse.
Goods have to be produced for currency to be valued lul. I am above comment forgot to respond.
In both cases, wealth is generated through property (capital), which is made up by surplus value. They're bourgeois.
This is now a thread about what methods you would use to inflict bodily harm onto billionaires in the year 2050, even if it means your own death/prison.
1 % sterilizes the 99 % so that they die out. Only the 1 % remain and thus live in communist utopia, because there is no state anymore and only one class.
Acid definitely. It'll never get old.
I throw acid in their face, capisce
No. It's about the resproduction of capital. It's about making investments with the hope of getting more money out of the system than you put in. You realize that this isn't a sustainable thing that can go on forever, right? This is like cutting down the forest a bit faster than it regrow and expecting the forest to be around forever.
please don't make me go into my molyneux folder. you haven't actually supported any of the claims you have made
If things get any worse these people would have to literally imprison themselves in their houses to stay safe. We're approaching the tolerance limit.
By 2020, egging their McMansion. By 2050 driving an SUV into their McMansion destroying their living room and killing their dog.
what the fuck are you talking about tbh
any gains made by an investment are offset by losses from other investments. if that even has anything to do with the point you're trying to make
No I'm just being honest. In 2050 people are going to be fucking furious. The white collar death rate will climb. Everyone will hold hands together at how much they fucking seething murderous hatred for everyone who has over $10,000,000,000.
Turn on the news, m8, the welfare state is being dismantled everywhere are cuts and privatization is the order of the day. You want me to prove this to you?
What a meme my dude. I wonder what the point of investment is if you can't make any profit off of it.
You realize that fiat money still has to represent something and that when you just print more money just to pay off debts it ceases to have value right?
Don't tell the workers!
[molymeme posted; retard dismissed]
which has nothing to do with the question of "where does the money come from"
Literally not an argument.
Are you some kind of Holla Forumsyp that jerks off to that dystopian scenario because of contrarian resentment politics or what?
Make some IEDs, go to the hamptons, let what will be, be, for this new world isn’t for me.
Mods need to ban images of our mascot being violated
Don't worry she's part of a "sex worker:" """union""" so it's OK.
Fun fact:You're already beyond fucked alive for being born into poverty.
I have literally stolen hundreds of thousands of dollars from companies that I have worked for. They aren't invulnerable. Humans are weak and depraved. Communism will triumph in the end.
Tell me your secrets jesus
End this meme. It will take 2 centuries minimum before full automation happens.
Known gas station cashiers who have stolen around this amount of money.
Getting harder as porky embraces the digital age through.
Nice weasel word
Basically it goes like this:
Shooting isn't enough. Teach them the price of wealth with acid.
The economy would completely collapse and they would starve.
you understood nothing kid, the last crisis was the begining of the end, next crisis will be the begining of capitalism substitute
This is the only funny one I've seen so far, Holla Forums really needs to step it up.
I don't understand how basic income would work, where the fuck would the bourgs get their money if there is no longer any labour to exploit?
It's literally impossible.
So, what is your society? The oligarchs: people who own everything.
The welfare leeches. People who live off their donations.
The specialists. People who maintain and develop all the systems.
They will rebel against the oligarchs using the very police state and technology they own, and deal with the leeches. Voila, communism won.
AH yes but by 2070 they need people to man the asteroid mining. This is one thing that kinda scares me, space capitalism. The expanse is basically a guide to how this shit will look and man, it ain't pretty.
Never gonna happen. At the barest minimum, there will be the demand for human servants. The subservience of a fellow human being, the degrading of a theoretical equal, is the most absolute use value.
Is the optimal population size for Capital calculable from this analysis? If not why not. Was the "Green Revolution" and the foreign aid system designed to create a global reserve army of the unemployed? Why does Capitalism require a mass consumer market when that was more of a later development in its evolution, why wouldn't it simply continue to rebuild itself afresh with each phase of advancement in technology, and so biopower?
There's one thing you aren't counting on: externalities.
are mutually incompatible.