A World Without Capitalism and Tradable Shares?

[Mac-7]

But George is much smarter than they were. Just ask him.

That seems to be the attitude of each new generation of marxists

they think they are smarter than everyone else including failed marxists of past generations

 

[georgephillip]

What's wrong with Corporations and other voluntary groups of citizens being allowed to stand up to the All-Powerful king or government?

Today corporations with their doctrine of a "Divine Right of Capital" remind me more of hereditary royalty than any group of citizens demanding their freedom. What happens when these private tyrannies become better funded than states?
Who is More Powerful – Countries or Companies?

https://abcfinance.co.uk/blog/companies-more-profitable-than-countries/#:~:text=Seven%20of%20the%20world's%2010,and%20JP%20Morgan%20Chase%20%26%20Co.

"Notable Stats

• "The 10 most profitable companies combined would be the third wealthiest country, with a higher GDP than Japan.
• Saudi Aramco, the world’s richest company, is more profitable than Italy, Brazil, Canada and Russia.
• The UK’s richest corporations have a larger market cap than Belgium, Sweden and Thailand.
• Apple’s CEO takes home the highest salary at £96.6 million. It would take the average Apple employee 784 years to make his yearly salary."

 

[georgephillip]

Socialists don't like it because it is a hindrance to their dream of an All-Powerful State that will micromanage their subjects' lives

That's a very narrow definition of socialism.

Other examples include worker self-directed enterprises where every employee has an equal vote in what to produce, where to produce it, and how the surplus is distributed.

Capitalism, on the other hand, has a fixed view that a small minority of owners/shareholders are entitled to make all decisions especially about how profits are distributed not unlike a feudal lord (or slave master)

The Divine Right of Capital by Marjorie Kelly: A Summary

"The Principle of Privilege:

"Stockholders claim wealth they do little to create, much as nobles claimed privilege they did not earn.

"'If equality under the law is the hallmark of democracy, privilege sanctioned by law is the hallmark of aristocracy.'

"Just as feudal lords extracted wealth from serfs on their lands, today’s aristocracy does the same with corporations.

"Privilege – the right of the aristocracy – is 'a right to income detached from productivity.'"

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Socialists don't like it because it is a hindrance to their dream of an All-Powerful State that will micromanage their subjects' lives

That's a very narrow definition of socialism.

Other examples include worker self-directed enterprises where every employee has an equal vote in what to produce, where to produce it, and how the surplus is distributed.

Capitalism, on the other hand, has a fixed view that a small minority of owners/shareholders are entitled to make all decisions especially about how profits are distributed not unlike a feudal lord (or slave master)

The Divine Right of Capital by Marjorie Kelly: A Summary

"The Principle of Privilege:

"Stockholders claim wealth they do little to create, much as nobles claimed privilege they did not earn.

"'If equality under the law is the hallmark of democracy, privilege sanctioned by law is the hallmark of aristocracy.'

"Just as feudal lords extracted wealth from serfs on their lands, today’s aristocracy does the same with corporations.

"Privilege – the right of the aristocracy – is 'a right to income detached from productivity.'"

Other examples include worker self-directed enterprises where every employee has an equal vote in what to produce, where to produce it, and how the surplus is distributed.

Why should the C-suite officers have the same vote as you?
You're obviously much more knowledgeable........

Stockholders claim wealth they do little to create, much as nobles claimed privilege they did not earn.

Why should owners have any say in anything?

 

[georgephillip]

Hitler was no "capitalist", he was a national Socialist. In a letter from Mr. Hitler to his good friend Julius Streicher , he acknowledges it. Remember this about Hitler, the entire basis of nazism was the idea of telling other people what to do- that the All Powerful government could run your life better than you can

Hitler killed German communists and millions of Soviet socialists, and he gave a medal to Henry Ford. In other words, Mo was wrong about that part too:

Adolf Hitler was not a socialist

"Nazism arose in a very specific — and very German — political environment.

"To begin with, Germany had a long history of socialist and Marxist political organizing even before the First World War, which launched in 1914.

"(So no, Rep. Brooks, the Nazi Party was not the 'socialist' party of Germany — that would have been the Social Democratic Party, or perhaps the Communist Party of Germany.)"

 

[boedicca]

It worked in the Soviet Union, eh comrade?

Socialism worked well enough in the Soviet Union to win WWII and put the first human being into space.

Are you disappointed?

And the Soviets only killed 62M people!

USSR--Genocide and Mass Murder

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Hitler killed German communists and millions of Soviet socialists,

What do you call millions of dead German communists and dead Soviet socialists......a good start!

 

[georgephillip]

There was a time when corporations were governed by charters that set some limits upon the mischief that they could get up to. In those days of yore, it was inconcievable that they could ever be considered self-soveriegn entities, being granted all the privileges and immunities of a mortal being without any of the inherent responsibilities.

How long before they want to issue their own corporate (crypto) currencies?

 

[Polishprince]

Hitler was no "capitalist", he was a national Socialist. In a letter from Mr. Hitler to his good friend Julius Streicher , he acknowledges it. Remember this about Hitler, the entire basis of nazism was the idea of telling other people what to do- that the All Powerful government could run your life better than you can

Hitler killed German communists and millions of Soviet socialists, and he gave a medal to Henry Ford. In other words, Mo was wrong about that part too:

Adolf Hitler was not a socialist

"Nazism arose in a very specific — and very German — political environment.

"To begin with, Germany had a long history of socialist and Marxist political organizing even before the First World War, which launched in 1914.

"(So no, Rep. Brooks, the Nazi Party was not the 'socialist' party of Germany — that would have been the Social Democratic Party, or perhaps the Communist Party of Germany.)"

American socialists loved Henry Ford too. They loved him because he doubled assembly line pay, supposedly so his employees would be his customers.

 

[georgephillip]

Germany was allowed to re-arm because the Western Powers were too spineless to stop him

Bankers in New York and London armed Hitler because global socialism was sweeping the globe, and rich parasites will always find fascists to protect their private property:

Socialist Party | The Encyclopedia of Oklahoma History and Culture

"SOCIALIST PARTY.

"In the first two decades of the twentieth century the Socialist Party of Oklahoma consistently ranked as one of the top three state socialist organizations in America.

"At the party's height in the elections of 1914, the Socialist Party candidate for governor, Fred W. Holt, received more than 20 percent of the vote statewide.

"In Marshall and Roger Mills counties, where the Socialist Party was strongest, Holt captured 41 and 35 percent of the vote, respectively.

"More than 175 socialists were elected to local and county offices that year, including six to the state legislature.

"As these statistics make clear, to a greater extent than anywhere else in the nation, the Socialist Party in Oklahoma played an active, potent role in state and local politics."

 

[georgephillip]

he NAZIs were socialist, dumbass.

No, they weren't.

Adolf Hitler was not a socialist

"Whatever interest Hitler had in socialism was not based on an understanding of socialism that we might have today — a movement that would supplant capitalism in which the working class would seize power over the state and the means of production.

"He repeatedly pushed back efforts by economically left-leaning elements of the party to enact socialist reforms, saying in a 1926 conference in Bamberg (organized by Nazi Party leaders over the very question of the party’s ideological underpinnings) that any effort to take the homes and estates of German princes would move the party toward communism and that he would never do anything to assist 'communist-inspired movements.'

"He prohibited the formation of Nazi trade unions, and by 1929 he outright rejected any efforts by Nazis who argued in favor of socialistic ideas or projects in their entirety."

 

[georgephillip]

Unadulterated horseshit. The "Trump's lies" meme is propaganda created by the Washington Post. Only idiots believe the Washington Post.

There's never been a bigger liar in the White House than Don the Con:

Lies and Half-Truths: Donald Trump’s Viral Axios Interview

 

[georgephillip]

One guy claims we shouldn't count the Holodomore even though that's where Stalin deliberated starved the Ukrainians to death.

He pointed out western banks refused Stalin loans, so his only asset was Ukrainian grain exports. British capitalists did far worse in India and Ireland, and US capitalists resorted to chattel slavery and genocide to launch their fortunes.

 

[Polishprince]

"He prohibited the formation of Nazi trade unions, and by 1929 he outright rejected any efforts by Nazis who argued in favor of socialistic ideas or projects in their entirety."

Actually, this is dead wrong. National Socialist Germany MANDATED membership in the German Labour Front headed by the labor boss, Robert Ley. Dues had to be paid, no Right to Work allowed by Hitler.

The Germans didn't want any competitive unions. But they did have Compulsory unions.

 

[bripat9643]

he NAZIs were socialist, dumbass.

No, they weren't.

Adolf Hitler was not a socialist

"Whatever interest Hitler had in socialism was not based on an understanding of socialism that we might have today — a movement that would supplant capitalism in which the working class would seize power over the state and the means of production.

"He repeatedly pushed back efforts by economically left-leaning elements of the party to enact socialist reforms, saying in a 1926 conference in Bamberg (organized by Nazi Party leaders over the very question of the party’s ideological underpinnings) that any effort to take the homes and estates of German princes would move the party toward communism and that he would never do anything to assist 'communist-inspired movements.'

"He prohibited the formation of Nazi trade unions, and by 1929 he outright rejected any efforts by Nazis who argued in favor of socialistic ideas or projects in their entirety."

Sorry, NAZI, but no definition of socialism I have ever seen requires the expropriation of private homes. That's communism. It also doesn't require trade unions. That's just leftwing propaganda that it does.

NAZIism may not be the form of socialism you endorse, but then, nothing on this earth is.

 

[bripat9643]

One guy claims we shouldn't count the Holodomore even though that's where Stalin deliberated starved the Ukrainians to death.

He pointed out western banks refused Stalin loans, so his only asset was Ukrainian grain exports. British capitalists did far worse in India and Ireland, and US capitalists resorted to chattel slavery and genocide to launch their fortunes.

That's all leftwing horseshit. If socialism is the superior economic system, why does it require loans from Western banks?

Capitalism doesn't require slavery. In fact, slavery inhibits capitalism, and all the fortunes built up utilizing slavery were destroyed during the Civil War. The South is still lagging behind the rest of the country economically because of slavery and the Civil War.

What happened in India and Ireland wasn't the result of capitalism. IN both cases The British government prohibited imports of grain. That ain't capitalism. At best it's mercantilism. Capitalism is built on free trade. Capitalists opposed these measures.

 

[bripat9643]

Socialists don't like it because it is a hindrance to their dream of an All-Powerful State that will micromanage their subjects' lives

That's a very narrow definition of socialism.

Other examples include worker self-directed enterprises where every employee has an equal vote in what to produce, where to produce it, and how the surplus is distributed.

Capitalism, on the other hand, has a fixed view that a small minority of owners/shareholders are entitled to make all decisions especially about how profits are distributed not unlike a feudal lord (or slave master)

The Divine Right of Capital by Marjorie Kelly: A Summary

"The Principle of Privilege:

"Stockholders claim wealth they do little to create, much as nobles claimed privilege they did not earn.

"'If equality under the law is the hallmark of democracy, privilege sanctioned by law is the hallmark of aristocracy.'

"Just as feudal lords extracted wealth from serfs on their lands, today’s aristocracy does the same with corporations.

"Privilege – the right of the aristocracy – is 'a right to income detached from productivity.'"

Other examples include worker self-directed enterprises where every employee has an equal vote in what to produce, where to produce it, and how the surplus is distributed.

Why should the C-suite officers have the same vote as you?
You're obviously much more knowledgeable........

Stockholders claim wealth they do little to create, much as nobles claimed privilege they did not earn.

Why should owners have any say in anything?

Yeah, Just because they supplied all the money to build the factories, that's no reason they should get anything in return!

What Georgie continually fails to understand is that stockholders get exactly what the company agreed to when it sold them the stock, and workers get exactly what they agreed to when they took the job. Socialists just don't grock the concept of VOLUNTARY EXCHANGE.

 

[bripat9643]

Unadulterated horseshit. The "Trump's lies" meme is propaganda created by the Washington Post. Only idiots believe the Washington Post.

There's never been a bigger liar in the White House than Don the Con:

Lies and Half-Truths: Donald Trump’s Viral Axios Interview

There's a bigger one in there right now. Remember when he said he had a plan to end the COVID epidemic? He already admitted that was a lie. He has no plan. Remember when he said he wasn't going to take our guns? He lied about that too.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

He pointed out western banks refused Stalin loans, so his only asset was Ukrainian grain exports.

Stalin didn't want to starve millions of Ukrainians, but he really needed a loan.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Socialists don't like it because it is a hindrance to their dream of an All-Powerful State that will micromanage their subjects' lives

That's a very narrow definition of socialism.

Other examples include worker self-directed enterprises where every employee has an equal vote in what to produce, where to produce it, and how the surplus is distributed.

Capitalism, on the other hand, has a fixed view that a small minority of owners/shareholders are entitled to make all decisions especially about how profits are distributed not unlike a feudal lord (or slave master)

The Divine Right of Capital by Marjorie Kelly: A Summary

"The Principle of Privilege:

"Stockholders claim wealth they do little to create, much as nobles claimed privilege they did not earn.

"'If equality under the law is the hallmark of democracy, privilege sanctioned by law is the hallmark of aristocracy.'

"Just as feudal lords extracted wealth from serfs on their lands, today’s aristocracy does the same with corporations.

"Privilege – the right of the aristocracy – is 'a right to income detached from productivity.'"

Other examples include worker self-directed enterprises where every employee has an equal vote in what to produce, where to produce it, and how the surplus is distributed.

Why should the C-suite officers have the same vote as you?
You're obviously much more knowledgeable........

Stockholders claim wealth they do little to create, much as nobles claimed privilege they did not earn.

Why should owners have any say in anything?

Yeah, Just because they supplied all the money to build the factories, that's no reason they should get anything in return!

What Georgie continually fails to understand is that stockholders get exactly what the company agreed to when it sold them the stock, and workers get exactly what they agreed to when they took the job. Socialists just don't grock the concept of VOLUNTARY EXCHANGE.

George has no money or stock, so no one else should have any....what a loser.