How can there be a Holla Forums if there's no such thing as a left? I'm extremely liberal in most every way...

You should honestly kill yourself OP is better for everyone

Yeah it's better to be forced by corporations to either work or starve.

This is what every socialist believes

If only there was a political ideology that advocated this…

People won't all make the same, they'll make according to their contribution and their need.

And capitalism used the state to assert itself, I don't know why socialism can't do the same.

OP is a dumbass

So you have an idea, and you make into a profitable plan which in turn you want to build as an industry.

You need workers to manufacture and sell your product (at the very least) but this is glorious socialism! So now your workers own the company you created and earn the same as you. Are you ok with this OP?

...

I thought the idea was that the guys at the top agreed to this because there is no such thing as class and no people to rule or be ruled over or something like that.

Are you talking about corporatism? That's what both Hitler and the Democrats did, and it isn't very capitalist.

In at least a free-market capitalist society, you're free to start up a co-op if you want to. The same can't be said for private enterprise in what you guys advocate.

the memes are getting danker and danker

I'm more annoyed this board is full of LARPers claiming they will kill porky but as far as actual politics go they constantly try to avoid doing anything at all in reform despite them knowing a revolution is just a pipe dream

kys

No, we're firmly against freeloaders. The difference is that we don't take your "kiss up, kick down" approach to what qualifies as "freeloading".

...

Only if they are extreme cucks or just like throwing years of education and effort to the pockets of the laborers they hire.

Socialism = workers democratically owning the means of production.

It isn't muh big gubermand giving people a handout.

No, it goes all the way back to the beginning of capitalism.

Quoth Adam Smith in The Wealth of Nations

Freeloading is the core of capitalism. It's the workers that create everything. Simply claiming something as your property doesn't mean you "made" it.

That sounds nice on paper yet is rarely so in real life, like most leftist memes.

The workers are the means of production since without them nothing would be produced. Going from that to

I work in this company

Is just retarded

So if you create a concept and decide to market it (god forbid profit should be made), the people who create the product 'own' it since they make it and not you?

...

Oh come the fuck on.

Smith was from a country that didn't guarantee the right to bear arms, right? You don't need a police force if you have an AR-15.

You even yourself admit that without the workers nothing would be produced. Why shouldn't they take control of what is theirs?

Yes. Creation of a concept entitles you to just compensation, not endless exploitation using state-enforced property right.

Not that capitalists create concepts themselves. They hire people to do that for them.

...

I repeat, oh come the fuck on. That entire speech completely distracts from the fact that "socialists" militarized for the Democratic Party have no idea how to run a business or do anything that isn't related to their Diversity Appreciation class or whatever the fuck non-STEM people waste someone else's money on.

wow that's a really good argument i should remember that one

neither do cappies, otherwise we wouldn't be in an eternal recession

Its dubious that you'd be able to defend your factory with one assault rifle from your thousands of employees.

Even then, even if you were able to defend your factory as a one man army, you need the state to defend your five other factories that you don't personally work in but still "own"

Didn't you say claiming something as yours doesn't just make it so? Then what is actually the workers' ? Fucking nothing as the employer can just choose to get rid of them and get new workers who won't get uppity and suddenly decide the product you created and they manufacture is 'theirs'.

Thank you, this compensation is what I was talking about the whole time, dont know where we jumped from that to 'exploitation'. That's a wild assumption there friendo.

So you only own something if you're personally there working on it 24/7? If you delegate the creation of an object to someone else does ownership change?

Do leftists even understand what owning something means?

owning something is theft

read Proudhon

They're both conservative parties, the Democrats are merely less right-wing than the Republicans. You're not going to find many Shillary supporters on here.

All bourgeois property is theft, and it is all illegitimate.

I was simply talking about what you could realistically defend yourself without assistance from the state. That is, very little.

No you'd just need a private security firm. I'd also point out that Smith predates the advent of the middle class, one of the great creations of capitalism that gives workers comfortable living without having to worry about owning or running a large-scale corporation. Of course this no longer is, thanks to the fascists in our government.

Is Elizabeth Warren not jewing so many impressionable youths into believing Hillary Clinton will help further their cause? I understand the ideology that nobody should be without compensation, but can you really refute all of the work a CEO does by saying "you didn't build dem roads"?

top meme lad

No wonder leftists feel entitled to everything. Does that mean everything you have right now that you didn't work on creating was stolen? So you stole the computer you're sperging on right now? The clothes you're wearing were also stolen?

Of course this is assuming you don't actually create everything you possess, because as a true, honorbound, for the workers leftist you did create your own things right? You didn't steal them from the worker who made them by paying money for it, RIGHT?

yes

You're on leftypol, so yes he can.

Liberal doesn't know what bourgeois property is

The means of production and commodities aren't the same thing

Welp.

Wew lads. The sweatshop overlord won't be happy about this.

MARX MUNCHED BOIPUSSY
I'MMA REDISTRIBUTE YOUR SEXTUPS TO ME

ur a retard lmao

We don't care about CEO's being compensated for their work; we care that they're compensated for ours.

So then, workers are also CEOs! This makes sense because socialism!

It's like I'm watching fox news

Fucking hell take a business class if you want to know where that "value" is going.

You didn't even watch it lol.

Fair and balanced, bitch.

now thats ideology

its all going to boards of directors, shareholders and CEO stock options

Back into his pocket. "le take a business class", you say this like socialist such as Andrew Kliman and Richard Wolff aren't aware of how the economy operates despite having PHD's in it.

...

Oh wow it's a consensus. Is there not one lefty who actually understands how a business works, or am I doomed to debating with actual hammers and sickles?

here, take a look how a buisness works

thenation.com/article/worker-cooperatives-are-more-productive-than-normal-companies/

Where else is it goin cause it sure as hell isnt goin to the workers. Their wages are recorded as an expense from which net profit or loss is partially calculated from.

Maybe you could try to read instead of automatically posting the spin-driven refutation one.

...

...

Literally everything meme man in your post claims are written down as expenses that are used to calculate net profit or loss when it is time to do the income statment which is then rolled into owners equity so tell me how all theses expenses are paid for by the profit that is calculated off of them and the businesses revenue?

Why do you care? You'll refute any explanation I give with a meme anyway. Maybe there's a reason you folks are unable to post on Holla Forums and are reduced to this torture chamber board.

cause too much butthurt and get banned

Not an argument snek oil man

Ironic, since Holla Forums was created when Holla Forums became such an echo chamber no one wanted to post there anymore.

I could not care in the slightest. I asked why this board even existed, and you answered my question using first-hand evidence. Go argue with Mr. Giuliani I think is still on; I'm out.

The Holla Forumsyp fears the spookbuster

You may be mistaking me for someone else I'm just calling you on your shit that profit goes to paying for expenses when in fact expenses are already payed for, or are liabilities that will become expenses at a later date, by the time that profit is even calculated

What a sperg

I agree he couldnt handle someone knowing how businesses are run from a financial perspective and just sperged out

You mean private state.

Sometimes I wonder if all those ancap memes around here are just strawmen. I hope this is just a b8 post and you're just havin a good laff at our expense, cause I don't wanna believe that there's a group of people out there who are this stupid.

So you're basically making the argument that exploitation is okay because the surplus value is put to good use?

Do you have any evidence that this is the case? Are capitalists under any pressure to put their profits to good use? All evidence I'm aware of is them using their profits to further expand their profits, regardless of the social implications of what that process may take.

Go check out /liberty/. Or don't, if you prefer the bliss of ignorance.

Normally when Holla Forums uses this word, they think it means bit Jooish gubbermint. What does this word mean to you, friend?

what do you mean by "fascist"? I get the sense that you are kinda just sprinkling in buzzwords for the fun of it.

?

Sometimes amid all the b8 and Holla Forumsposters invading we have good conversations. Sometimes. Also the Holla Forums mods ban people who challenge their beliefs.

Anyways look up "leftism" or something like that. Maybe read the FAQ and come back to us.

If this is b8, keep in mind that if that b8ing leftypol is essentially cheating cause we get people all the time on here with shit even worse than this and they genuinely mean what they say. Plus we're all way too autistic to pick up on social cues and figure out when you're joking.

Hope that helps.

you're gosh darn right we will :^)

There comes a point in any discussion with an ancap where they stop arguing and start throwing insults. This usually comes right after you show them they don't actually know what socialism is, and all their ideals based on hating it are built with strawmen arguments and spooks.

But /liberty/ is the land of blissful ignorance, where NEETs and lumpenproletariat pretend that they're temporarily embarrassed captains of industry.

Saying liberty and capitalism are in conflict does this too, if it's not followed with liberty getting the axe and them going on about how capitalist authoritarianism is okay because business people are ultra-competent god-men who naturally deserve to rule over the common rabble and also it's voluntary authoritarianism so it's okay.

RIP OP

...

And what have you two done? Shitpost? Doing something productive is better than nothing. If you are smart and organized about it actual reach changes can be made. It's not easy though but it;s possible and more likely to happen than a successful revolution unless you live in a third world country or government has no military.

Reform puts off the revolution.

Worse than that, reform prolongs the harms of capitalism. I can personally think of no worse outcome for the world (environmentally, socially, culturally) than a Piketty-style wealth tax being used to prop up profits for another 100 years, so of course it'll probably happen.

If you do it right it IS the revolution.

If not for reformists, we would have communism by now.

Liberalism is political correctness. You can't be "liberal" and politically incorrect. It's an inherent contradiction.

Liberalism is support for capitalism.

Not if the reform is to abolish capitalism.

…Then it isn't reform? Do you understand what the word "reform" means?

...

im just fucking around. Also slightly drunk.

But to clear myself up more I am talking not as drastic and fast as a revolution but not as slow small gradual steps as reform normally is. So im not sure where that would fall.

until the workers that own the means of production for a certain resource realise their society cannot function without said resource and artificially inflate the value of that resource by intentionally minimizing production
co-operatives and communal societies fail as soon as the eusocial insects their society desires them to be become self-aware

Liberalism used to be a form of libertarian representative democracy
its become corrupted and perverse like all mainstream political ideologies

eternal recession is what you get when you adopt Lombardian jew banking schemes across the entire world but dont apply the same jewish laws concerning the annual forgiving of debts every 7 years
its a broken system operating indefinitely when it was meant to be routinely swept clean and presented as a clean slate

Funny enough, there's a story that pertains to this. It goes like this:

Once upon a time, there was a perfectly ordinary tribe of islander peoples among whom there existed a tradition that, if one had food and ran into a hungry man, one should give it to him so that he would not starve. Now, one time one of the villagers thought he was being a really clever piece of shit and came up with a scheme. Whenever someone went out fishing, he would wait at the beach, and when they'd return with their catch, he'd make a big show of how hungry he was and how his stomach groaned. Of course, they would give it to him, because that was the way they did things. Eventually they started getting tired of losing their hard-earned catch to this man, so they asked him nicely to stop. Then less nicely. Then, one time, all the fishermen got together to discuss the issue - what shall we do about this fat bastard? Eventually, they came up with a scheme. So they waited, and the next time one of them went out fishing, sure enough, he went to the beach where the boats landed. Just then, all the fishermen came out from hiding and they beat him to death.

Anyway, the scenario you describe wouldn't happen because in this case production is for use, not for market. And in any case it applies to capitalism as well (or, more specifically, to capitalism alone), so I can't see how you can possibly view it as a criticism of capitalism.

The problem is that the value of the US dollar and the entire system of US imperialism relies on there being an unforgiven debt. If we were to implement Mesopotamian amargi, global capitalism and US dominance would simply collapse. Reverting to metallic currency would only make things worse as you wouldn't be able to engage in any sort of pump priming via money creation or deficit spending.

where is the rule of law? what stops another man for committing the same sort of treachery further down the track?
your analogy is too simplistic
what happens if all the bakers decide to make secret dealings with the wheat farmers and the millers
the wheat farmers discard half their crop, the millers dispose of 'contaminated flour' and the bakers inflate the value of their bread all without the knowledge of the others
the others become enraged at the cost and lack of their bread and force answers from them
but they prove their innocence time and again, that the lack of resources is not caused by them but by 'failed crops', 'ineffective milling' and 'contaminated grain'

but everyone must have specialised roles yes?
what is the motivation for the farmer to produce excess food for the workers in the cities?
what is the role of the worker when noone requires the services they offer?

oh I know
its how they got all of Western Europe under their thumb after WW2 and how they've controlled dictators and rebel groups across the world for the last 50 years
the problem with the credit system is that the government became the banker
I've noticed theres a tendency to measure all grievances with capitalism using the US as an example
any reason this is so? is there a disproportionate amount of americans on leftypol?
Im not familiar with the american system tbqh

/liberty/ is /letypol/ trolling tbh.

go away

Not more than anywhere else, and in fact probably less since americlaps are especially illiterate at politics. But the US is deeper in the capitalist ideology than perhaps anywhere else, acting as capitalism's Mecca.

It's not an analogy, it's an actual folk tale from like Polynesia or something. The point of the story is that if you abuse the system to exploit a great deal of people, the great deal of people will turn around and deal with you.

The thing is that under a socialist system, you would not necessarily be exchanging things for other things. All you are providing is labour in exchange for stuff. The scarcity of the commodity you produce is irrelevant as your contribution would ideally be measured in some form of the scarcity of the labour you provide times hours worked. You could have something like a credit card with a certain limit that you use to buy goods, creating a debt - you repay this debt by providing labour at whichever place you work. This is assuming a situation of scarcity and that you're producing something needed in the first place, of course.

Furthermore, the sphere of production would fall under the public purview and have some form of oversight. If someone were abusing the system in some way in order to fuck over everyone else, public action would have to be taken - the beating to death, in this case.

Under this system, the motivation would be to give as good as you take, or more broadly to eat and have things. I don't know if you're going off the image going around that reduces socialism to socialized MoP, but there's actually a little more to it than that, namely the abolition of profit, among other things. Our current system of capitalism is based on accumulation: whenever you give something out, you get a little extra back, unless you're a prole in which case you're losing out. This is necessarily wasteful, as you'll eventually run into problems of overproduction as productivity increases, meaning that you will have more commodities on hand than people are capable of buying, and this is where destroying goods and sabotaging production in order to maintain price comes in. This is a problem of capitalism.

Of course, if you're not producing things in order to get more back but simply in order to satisfy someone's need, this is not a problem. As long as there are people who need what you're making, you'll be able to work because you're not necessarily expecting something in return. It doesn't matter if you can make 1000 loaves of bread in an hour or 10, you're still only working one hour and getting an hour's worth of contribution to count against your debt.

The other side of this is shortage and black markets, problems common to planned economies. Without demand to regulate supply, you run a serious risk of underproduction since there won't be any market forces pushing people to become bakers, and you'll likely see people hoarding the bread they can snatch up and making a profit by exchanging it on the black market. The simple way to fix this is to reintroduce demand by allowing bakers (and everyone else) to generate a profit (meaning that an hour of their time is worth more according to how much consumer demand there is for that good or service). If they try to hold people hostage by withholding bread and threatening starvation, you beat them to death. You should consider what exactly is stopping bakers, farmers and millers from pulling the same shit under our present form of societal organization. It's as much a risk under capitalism as it would be under socialism. In either case, people can investigate, obtain proof or catch them in the act, and beat them to death. In the case of necessities it's much less of a risk because it would be extremely difficult to set up a monopoly or cartel of such goods and competition would drive prices down.

thats barely different but requires so much more identification and bureaucratic tracking by the state
an overseer?
like a dictator or a king? an autocrat?
so the solution is murder the selfish, corrupt and immoral with impunity?
you'll create a system where you will consistently be murdering or 're-educating' you children

thats not inherently a problem caused by capitalism thats a product of a consumerist society

how do you feed a growing society then?
more mouths to feed will continue popping up, if you only make 10 loaves an hour and still get compensated for that hour the same as you would if you made 1000 loaves where do the other 990 people get their food?

absolutely nothing
except for the companies that acquire the produce and sell to the people
they wish to maximise profit until a certain degree so they will continue to buy produce from the producers to sell to the consumer
the more consumers the more produce is needed and the more motivation the producers have to produce more of their product, the problem is with the company that supplies the consumers, nothing stops them from charging whatever they want for the produce they've acquired right?
except for mercantile competition from competitor organisations
nothing to stop them unfortunately from making secret deals with one another and buying each other out so that eventually one person can control it all
which is the real problem, you dont want one man owning it all and charging what they want

...

All you faggots are good for is complaining, no wonder you're so poor. Being a low paid cog in the machine is exactly where you belong, it's like you don't realize there's a lot more to running a business than just punching a clock and pulling levers on a machine all day.

what do you know about running a business

I run a small business. I'm always open to listening to employers suggestions, but honestly most of them are as dumb as the guy I was responding to, and if they "overthrew me and seized the means of production" they'd run the business into the ground in a few months because they don't understand anything about the business other than their specific job.

Based on your posts so far, I'm convinced you could be replaced by a semi-literate chimpanzee and no one would know the difference.

Nice argument friends :^)

Bet he's a boomer. Barely literate and overconfident in their abilities due to living in the era of spoonfeeding.

That comic is such complete bullshit.

The worker can't make a product without a manager to tell him what to make, a designer to create the product, an engineer to tell him how to make the product, storage to store the products, marketing to advertise the product and the merchant to sell the product.

The owner is just the guy, who knows what might sell, brings all these people together and funds them, using his own may, which he may or may not get back.

So realistically the worker is nothing, but a mean of production (especially apparent in the age of automation) and has no entitlement to anything he produces, since it possesses no value outside of the other parts of the corporation.

Moreover, as a mean of production, the worker should be treated as property.

this better be ironic, if not you are not a very smart man

i understand how it works, i even take classes on it. we even start or own little business just to check it out. i am still a leftist, i would say it made me more left tbh

They aren't dumb. They just don't give a fuck.

Are you being serious or are you LARPing as an 1850s factory laborer who's woke af fam?