Capitalist or Labor?

Are you a capitalist? Or, are you labor?

If you are a capitalist you make all your money from interest and or dividends.

If you produce goods or services for a fee, you are labor.

Totally wrong and false dichotomy.
Thread fail.
 
Not to mention the fact. That as Labor you can take the money you are paid for Producing, and invest it. thereby earning Interest and Dividends. :)

So actually in the US most workers are Both labor and Capitalist.

My work is done here.

Horse Shit!

First off, while it may be true that during the mid 20th century, incomes some of the workers increase enough that there was some capital investment by workers, the past 30 years has seen a gross decrease in the real incomes of workers, while there has been a steady increase in the cost of living. The amount that workers can invest nowadays ranges from negligible to none.

Secondly, given the major costs centers (i.e. education, healthcare, retirement, etc.), any capital investments made by workers are eventually liquidated and spent. No real and lasting capital accumulation occurs.

Thirdly, the division of soceity into a tiny priviledged class called 'investors' who's income far exceeds their real productivity, leaving the majority, who are responsible for all productivity, unable to make ends meet is obscene. Working should lead to capital accumulation, but it does not.

Fourth, the gross inbalance of wealth distribution - one that devalues productivity and favors asset ownership - will eventually lead to an ever receding economy - not to mention an ever increased need for government to provideworkers what the economic system has not.

If workers were paid according to their productive value, rather than the minimum that ownership can get away with, workers would retire at 45 and become investors. Instead, despite the incredible increases in worker productivity during the last 50 years, the retiremenet age is going up rather than down, and workers never accumulate capital assets to any meaningful degree.

The capitalist system is the economically advantaged taking advantage of the economically disadvantaged. Ideally, the workers of all levels (white collar, blue collar and professional) should get together and thru collective bargaining, force wages according to productive value. This would only be the employment of the capitalist principal of economic competitiveness. It seems that only airline pilots are smart enough to do this.

The result is that without collective bargaining, this grossly unfair and inbalanced system of wealth distribution continues - the result being that workers elect semi-socialist politicians and expect the government to provide. Not the best solution.
 
Money can be divided into capital and labor, as it behaves differently. People can't be divided that way, unless they are really weird special cases. No working person of any sense makes no investments and squanders all their income directly as it comes in. Those who live entirely by squandering an inheritance like Paris Hilton are freaks as well.

Trying to make a general case based on freaks is not the road to understanding.
 
Not to mention the fact. That as Labor you can take the money you are paid for Producing, and invest it. thereby earning Interest and Dividends. :)

So actually in the US most workers are Both labor and Capitalist.

My work is done here.

Horse Shit!

First off, while it may be true that during the mid 20th century, incomes some of the workers increase enough that there was some capital investment by workers, the past 30 years has seen a gross decrease in the real incomes of workers, while there has been a steady increase in the cost of living. The amount that workers can invest nowadays ranges from negligible to none.

Secondly, given the major costs centers (i.e. education, healthcare, retirement, etc.), any capital investments made by workers are eventually liquidated and spent. No real and lasting capital accumulation occurs.

Thirdly, the division of soceity into a tiny priviledged class called 'investors' who's income far exceeds their real productivity, leaving the majority, who are responsible for all productivity, unable to make ends meet is obscene. Working should lead to capital accumulation, but it does not.

Fourth, the gross inbalance of wealth distribution - one that devalues productivity and favors asset ownership - will eventually lead to an ever receding economy - not to mention an ever increased need for government to provideworkers what the economic system has not.

If workers were paid according to their productive value, rather than the minimum that ownership can get away with, workers would retire at 45 and become investors. Instead, despite the incredible increases in worker productivity during the last 50 years, the retiremenet age is going up rather than down, and workers never accumulate capital assets to any meaningful degree.

The capitalist system is the economically advantaged taking advantage of the economically disadvantaged. Ideally, the workers of all levels (white collar, blue collar and professional) should get together and thru collective bargaining, force wages according to productive value. This would only be the employment of the capitalist principal of economic competitiveness. It seems that only airline pilots are smart enough to do this.

The result is that without collective bargaining, this grossly unfair and inbalanced system of wealth distribution continues - the result being that workers elect semi-socialist politicians and expect the government to provide. Not the best solution.

Another graduate of the Patrice Lumumba Economics Dept.

Hey, dumbshit. Ever hear of pension plans? 401Ks? How much of the stock market comes from those retirement plans done for WORKERS?
 
Not to mention the fact. That as Labor you can take the money you are paid for Producing, and invest it. thereby earning Interest and Dividends. :)

So actually in the US most workers are Both labor and Capitalist.

My work is done here.

Horse Shit!

First off, while it may be true that during the mid 20th century, incomes some of the workers increase enough that there was some capital investment by workers, the past 30 years has seen a gross decrease in the real incomes of workers, while there has been a steady increase in the cost of living. The amount that workers can invest nowadays ranges from negligible to none.

Secondly, given the major costs centers (i.e. education, healthcare, retirement, etc.), any capital investments made by workers are eventually liquidated and spent. No real and lasting capital accumulation occurs.

Thirdly, the division of soceity into a tiny priviledged class called 'investors' who's income far exceeds their real productivity, leaving the majority, who are responsible for all productivity, unable to make ends meet is obscene. Working should lead to capital accumulation, but it does not.

Fourth, the gross inbalance of wealth distribution - one that devalues productivity and favors asset ownership - will eventually lead to an ever receding economy - not to mention an ever increased need for government to provideworkers what the economic system has not.

If workers were paid according to their productive value, rather than the minimum that ownership can get away with, workers would retire at 45 and become investors. Instead, despite the incredible increases in worker productivity during the last 50 years, the retiremenet age is going up rather than down, and workers never accumulate capital assets to any meaningful degree.

The capitalist system is the economically advantaged taking advantage of the economically disadvantaged. Ideally, the workers of all levels (white collar, blue collar and professional) should get together and thru collective bargaining, force wages according to productive value. This would only be the employment of the capitalist principal of economic competitiveness. It seems that only airline pilots are smart enough to do this.

The result is that without collective bargaining, this grossly unfair and inbalanced system of wealth distribution continues - the result being that workers elect semi-socialist politicians and expect the government to provide. Not the best solution.

Another graduate of the Patrice Lumumba Economics Dept.

Hey, dumbshit. Ever hear of pension plans? 401Ks? How much of the stock market comes from those retirement plans done for WORKERS?

If you haven't noticed, pensions plans are a thing of the past. 401k plans have devalued. Where did all the money earned by the workers go?

The entire scheme to end pension plans and replace them with 401ks has never been anything other than a scheme for the investment class to steal the retirement savings of the workers:

Given that 401k plans pour hundreds of millions of dollars into the stock market every week, like a blind elephant, the market should be constantly going up.

Instead short-term investors routinely sell, driving the market down, taking the profits and effectively shifting the workers 401k money into their own pockets. They then buy again when the market is relatively low, wait for the 401k investments to drive it up again, then repeat.

401k plans have never been anything but a scam - and workers are completely disempowered in managing their own funds.

Either way, neither 401k or pension plans ever come close to paying employees on par with their productive value.
 
What is "their productive value"? How do you measure it?
And I thought you said these were things of the past? How can they be things of the past and now devalued, i.e. still existing?

I realize asking for a logical explanation for your ravings isn't going to turn out well. But merely exposing your crazy stupid and wrong ideas to the light of truth should be enough to tell most readers here you are off your meds.
 

Forum List

Back
Top