Beware the Marxist world of Kamalla Harris: "There’s a big difference between equality and equity."

[dblack]

Isn't that what it does when it legitimizes ownership of property?

No.

 

[Curried Goats]

No.

Then explain how property can be obtained without force.

 

[dblack]

Then explain how property can be obtained without force.

You've never heard of voluntary trade?

 

[Curried Goats]

You've never heard of voluntary trade?

Sure. What does that have to do with what I asked?

 

[dblack]

Sure. What does that have to do with what I asked?

I answered your question clearly.
I'm not playing horseshit games with you. If you think you have a point, make it and we'll discuss.

 

[Curried Goats]

I answered your question clearly.
I'm not playing horseshit games with you. If you think you have a point, make it and we'll discuss.

You didn't. You asked me a question. Asking a question isn't the same as explaining your philosophy. I understand what voluntary trade is. I don't understand the relevance here. If I pick a bunch of apples off a tree and you've caught some fish in a river then we can freely exchange items with one another without ever having used force against another human being. That's not what I'm talking about and I believe you know that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about property in terms of someone claiming ownership of the apple tree itself or the river itself. That you can't do without force. There is no plausible scenario where you've gone around and have gotten the consent of everyone on earth that that tree or river is yours.

 

[dblack]

.

You didn't. You asked me a question.

Ok. Horseshit games it is.

Back in the troll penalty box with you.

 

[Curried Goats]

.
Ok. Horseshit games it is.

That's just name calling. If you can dissect my argument then I'd be happy to hear it.

Back in the troll penalty box with you.

Ok whatever. I keep giving you opportunity and you keep passing it up.

 

[dblack]

That's just name calling. If you can dissect my argument then I'd be happy to hear it.

Ok whatever. I keep giving you opportunity and you keep passing it up.

Piss off, troll.

 

[Curried Goats]

Piss off, troll.

You're the one getting angry and calling names.

 

[TruthNotBS]

You want the money first and the work second
Cart before horse is the entirety of your child like assertions
Are you over 20?

Your disingenuous, silly accusation that I want "the money first and the work second" completely misrepresents the arguments I presented. Let's break this down in a way that highlights the key issues, which you conveniently ignored:

1. Exploitation Under Capitalism: Capitalism inherently exploits the majority to benefit a select few who enrich themselves through others' labor. This isn't about wanting money without working; it's about ensuring that those who do the work receive their fair share of the value they create. Under capitalism, workers sell their labor power—essentially their lives, bodies, presence, and time to capitalist parasites who then extract surplus value from this labor to enrich themselves (If anyone isn't working, it's them, not the workers). This relationship reduces human beings to mere cogs in the capitalist machine, existing primarily to generate profit for others.
2. Democratic Rights in the Workplace: The current capitalist arrangement keeps people desperate for jobs, increasing the capitalist employer's leverage in negotiating the terms of employment. This lack of power for workers is fundamentally unjust. Economic democracy, where workers have a voice in the governance of their workplaces, is essential. Just as political democracy ensures that citizens have a voice in their government, economic democracy ensures that workers can control their own labor and the conditions under which they work.
3. Right to Unionize: Capitalist employers often strip workers of their right to unite and form unions to negotiate their terms of employment collectively. They prefer negotiating with individual workers because it gives them more power. When workers are isolated, they have less leverage. In contrast, unionized workers have more power, resulting in higher pay and more benefits. Strength in numbers allows workers to better protect their interests and negotiate more favorable terms.
4. Government's Role and Capitalist Control:The government could recognize and protect everyone's right to employment by ensuring full employment in the public sector. This would empower the working class to more effectively negotiate their terms of employment with capitalists. However, because capitalists often control the government, democracy is undermined and turned into a plutocratic oligarchy ruled by the wealthy. Capitalists benefit from maintaining a certain degree of unemployment and poverty because it increases their power when negotiating wages and decreases the cost of labor.
5. Systemic Instability and Public Bailouts: Capitalism privatizes profits but socializes losses, as evidenced by repeated bailouts of failing industries and financial institutions with public funds. This cycle of boom and bust underscores the system's inherent instability and reliance on public intervention to survive. This isn't about wanting something for nothing; it's about recognizing that the system is rigged to benefit the few at the expense of the many.
6. Automation, AI, and the Future of Work: With the advent of advanced automation and artificial intelligence, the capitalist model becomes even less viable. As machines and algorithms replace human labor, the traditional wage labor relationship upon which capitalism depends will erode. Without wages, capitalism cannot function because it relies on the continuous exploitation of human labor. This transition requires a shift to socialism, where the benefits of increased productivity from automation and AI are shared by all, not just the wealthy few.
7. Socialism is a Sustainable Alternative: Socialism advocates for the abolition of private property that exploits people for profit, allowing only personal property for personal use. Under socialism, the means of production are publicly owned and democratically managed by those who work them. This ensures that the benefits of production are more generously and abundantly shared and that decisions regarding production are made in the collective interest of society, rather than the narrow interest of a wealthy few capitalist parasites-leeches (unnecessary middlemen).

In summary, your characterization of my arguments as wanting "money first and work second" is a gross, infantile misrepresentation. The essence of my argument is about fairness, justice, and the sustainable organization of society. It's about ensuring that workers receive the value of what they produce, have democratic rights in their workplaces, and that the benefits of technological advancements are shared by all.

 

[dblack]

You're the one getting angry and calling names.

Yep. Unfortunately, I've dealt with you before, so you're on a very short leash.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

Obviously you have no idea about competition. You do sound like a fan. Yet that is why they have rules in sports. To make it fair and to play by the rules. That is why after the competition, they say good game. to each other. But obviously you believe winning is everything and you can do anything to win.

Apparently did my championship seasons wrong then. Of course I was busy up on the podium after the race and wasn’t down in the pits with the losers telling each other good race.

 

[dblack]

Apparently did my championship seasons wrong then. Of course I was busy up on the podium after the race and wasn’t down in the pits with the losers telling each other good race.

Sounds like you were cherry picking.

 

[Curried Goats]

Yep. Unfortunately, I've dealt with you before, so you're on a very short leash.

Listen I don't care if you can't rationalize your philosophy. You're a libertarian, right? I don't expect you to be able to.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

Your disingenuous, silly accusation that I want "the money first and the work second" completely misrepresents the arguments I presented. Let's break this down in a way that highlights the key issues, which you conveniently ignored:

1. Exploitation Under Capitalism: Capitalism inherently exploits the majority to benefit a select few who enrich themselves through others' labor. This isn't about wanting money without working; it's about ensuring that those who do the work receive their fair share of the value they create. Under capitalism, workers sell their labor power—essentially their lives, bodies, presence, and time to capitalist parasites who then extract surplus value from this labor to enrich themselves (If anyone isn't working, it's them, not the workers). This relationship reduces human beings to mere cogs in the capitalist machine, existing primarily to generate profit for others.
2. Democratic Rights in the Workplace: The current capitalist arrangement keeps people desperate for jobs, increasing the capitalist employer's leverage in negotiating the terms of employment. This lack of power for workers is fundamentally unjust. Economic democracy, where workers have a voice in the governance of their workplaces, is essential. Just as political democracy ensures that citizens have a voice in their government, economic democracy ensures that workers can control their own labor and the conditions under which they work.
3. Right to Unionize: Capitalist employers often strip workers of their right to unite and form unions to negotiate their terms of employment collectively. They prefer negotiating with individual workers because it gives them more power. When workers are isolated, they have less leverage. In contrast, unionized workers have more power, resulting in higher pay and more benefits. Strength in numbers allows workers to better protect their interests and negotiate more favorable terms.
4. Government's Role and Capitalist Control:The government could recognize and protect everyone's right to employment by ensuring full employment in the public sector. This would empower the working class to more effectively negotiate their terms of employment with capitalists. However, because capitalists often control the government, democracy is undermined and turned into a plutocratic oligarchy ruled by the wealthy. Capitalists benefit from maintaining a certain degree of unemployment and poverty because it increases their power when negotiating wages and decreases the cost of labor.
5. Systemic Instability and Public Bailouts: Capitalism privatizes profits but socializes losses, as evidenced by repeated bailouts of failing industries and financial institutions with public funds. This cycle of boom and bust underscores the system's inherent instability and reliance on public intervention to survive. This isn't about wanting something for nothing; it's about recognizing that the system is rigged to benefit the few at the expense of the many.
6. Automation, AI, and the Future of Work: With the advent of advanced automation and artificial intelligence, the capitalist model becomes even less viable. As machines and algorithms replace human labor, the traditional wage labor relationship upon which capitalism depends will erode. Without wages, capitalism cannot function because it relies on the continuous exploitation of human labor. This transition requires a shift to socialism, where the benefits of increased productivity from automation and AI are shared by all, not just the wealthy few.
7. Socialism is a Sustainable Alternative: Socialism advocates for the abolition of private property that exploits people for profit, allowing only personal property for personal use. Under socialism, the means of production are publicly owned and democratically managed by those who work them. This ensures that the benefits of production are more generously and abundantly shared and that decisions regarding production are made in the collective interest of society, rather than the narrow interest of a wealthy few capitalist parasites-leeches (unnecessary middlemen).

In summary, your characterization of my arguments as wanting "money first and work second" is a gross, infantile misrepresentation. The essence of my argument is about fairness, justice, and the sustainable organization of society. It's about ensuring that workers receive the value of what they produce, have democratic rights in their workplaces, and that the benefits of technological advancements are shared by all.

1- Start your own business.
2- Everyone has had to work since the dawn of time. A caveman that wouldn’t hunt or learn to grow food would die. Same thing today.
3- Private sector unions are fine. No government employee needs or deserves a union. Eliminate them.
4- Government needs shrunk to about 1/4 its current size. They’re the ones taking the bribes.
5- Stop fucking doing that. Bail outs are socialism.
6- Progress is always being made. Adjust.
7- Only an idiot thinks socialism will make things equal. All it does is lets the government take everything. Look at Venezuela. I can’t believe in your own lifetime you watched a nation fall so fast and so rock bottom because of socialism and you still think it’s a good idea. That’s moronic.

 

[Tyrion234]

WEATHER53

I'm repeating myself because you fail to address the point being made. Equity is not more of the same. The same is pretending rights are inalienable that people have acquired or have failed to have acquired capital and wealth due to merit.

so I made millions working as I have, but you get butthurt that my kids have a leg up because I’ve done so? F off child

 

[Tyrion234]

Wrong. When there are employers making 2-300 times their workers, something needs to change.

Link? A lot of employers are close
To living paycheck to paycheck as well so stfu

 

[Curried Goats]

WEATHER53

so I made millions working as I have, but you get butthurt that my kids have a leg up because I’ve done so? F off child

Is that supposed to be your adult argument?

 

[dblack]

Listen I don't care if you can't rationalize your philosophy. You're a libertarian, right? I don't expect you to be able to.

You listen, jerkoff. You asked a question, or rather made a demand: "... explain how property can be obtained without force."

I offered up voluntary trade. But then you decided that what you really had in mind was an entirely different question, which posited a situation where no property is owned and asked how we'd go about dividing it up. In that case, if we were starting over with all property being unowned, I suppose we could give everyone an equal share. But of course that would only last a generation or two. In due time, the people who used their property in ways that were most productive for society would get more property, and those who squandered it would lose out. And we right back in the same situation, where rich people had more than poor people.

Anyway - you can't debate honestly (you've proven it over and over again), so I have very little patience with your trolling. Go away.