irmoz

@irmoz@reddthat.com

This profile is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.

irmoz,

But I ain’t got no shit cos a bigger guy took it all.

irmoz, (edited )

Requiring a state to protect private property isn’t “the state running things”. Even right-libertarians concede the necessity of state to uphold private property laws. “The state running shit” would be like… a planned economy.

Don’t equivocate the two, yeah?

irmoz,

So, surplus value doesn’t exist, simply because some capitalists can… fail to extract it?

Listen buddy, a few people being bad at their job doesn’t mean the job doesn’t exist.

I don’t think you know what surplus value is. It’s the portion of the value that you make for the business that doesn’t go to you, but to the owner.

Do you also notice that I said “without going broke” and your example includes going broke?

irmoz,

I have plenty arguments. They were all written down for me by Adam Smith and improved by Milton Friedman.

irmoz, (edited )

It’s fucking bonkers that you think the definition of “things” is what’s at issue here.

I’m not disputing that lmao. But upholding private property law is not running the market. That would be, like i said, a planned economy.

irmoz, (edited )

It’s risky to capture a slave. Are risks always entitled to rewards?

The profit generated by the workers belongs to the workers. They made it. The owner didn’t. They needed the workers to make it. The owners aren’t “providing” the resources - they’re gatekeeping them, so that usage only happens under the condition that it benefits the owner.

Also, to be quite honest, it’s even unfair to the owner. They shouldn’t have to risk it alone. It should be a joint venture from the start. These risks should be undertaken together, with all as co-owners.

People are entitled their basic needs on the basis of being human. And all should have social ownership of the economy in general, with no individual or group having sole ownership and thus being the only ones to profit from it.

irmoz,

I never mentioned personal property. I’m talking about private property.

irmoz,

I feel like you’re missing the point on purpose.

The workers do the work, yet the owner is the one who gets the money.

Why?

Of course the wealthiest countries have free markets. Why would that be a coincidence? It’s exactly the mechanism I described, but on a global stage. Wealthy people exploit the poorer to become wealthier. Wealthy countries exploit poorer countries to become even wealthier.

This is a cycle that will only end with one person becoming the owner of everything, or revolution to end it.

irmoz, (edited )

The workers aren’t able to provide any of the equipment or capital for the business.

Aw, golly gee, I sure do wonder why they aren’t able to do this.

Because our system is set up that way!! Capitalism!

Our system is set up to enrich owners at the expense of workers. Simple as that.

irmoz,

Huh… So what’s the “cage”?

irmoz,

My favourite song is “Yellow” and my surname is “Rain”… you can guess what my first email at age 10 was…

Okay I made that up, but I bet something like that has happened

irmoz,

Anime pops up here and there

irmoz,

Memes, tech stuff, gaming, linux, and communist propaganda

Classic libertarian internet

irmoz,

Wild, I just saw this post

sh.itjust.works/post/4175837

irmoz,

How do you plan to self correct? What have people said?

irmoz,

Liberals are right wing.

irmoz,

That just isn’t true. People use liberal to mean in support of a liberal party, in this case, democrats.

If someone uses liberal to mean socialist, then they are just incorrect. The ideas are incompatible.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • localhost
  • All magazines
    •
    Loading…
    Loading the web debug toolbar…
    Attempt #