More economic GOOD News...DOW hits new record..on track to hit 17K.

[Marxist]

Wow......Without the business owner we have...WHAT?
Business does not operate for "the needs of society"...Nor should it.
Products and services are made available through market research.
Your premise would suggest you would have government force business for instance to continue making manual typewriters.
After all, the people employed by the typewriter manufacturer "need" jobs.
Have you a problem with the concept of profit?

I disagree with the idea of profit in regards to capitalism.

What does that mean?
I'll ask it another way..
If not for the purpose of profit potential( there are no guarantees) then where would be the incentive to start a business?

Why not start a business, in a system where the concept of profit and exploiting others isn't seen as ok.

Because a business that doesn't make a profit, isn't in business anymore. Hostess is a perfect example. They had high labor costs, and went broke.

You don't hire people unless you make a profit from hiring them. If you actually lose money by hiring someone.... why would you hire them?

You prove the concept. You start a business where you don't profit or "exploit" anyone. Go do it. Stop b!tching about it, and do it yourself.

Of course you can't. And you won't.

What he's espousing is an economy run by govco where there are no owners only slaves of the government.

I want workers to control the government while it exists, and I want collective ownership of production.

 

[Andylusion]

What's ironic is that a person who doesn't create a single job for anyone, would be praised. But someone who creates millions of jobs, is horrible and evil.

Years ago, in Hot Rod magazine, they had an article about this dude, who owned his own machine shop. He rolled his own sheet metal, and hand crafted entire cars. Built them from just the frame, to a full muscle car.

He did everything himself. The guy was a multi-millionaire because he made hundreds of thousands on each hand built car. Custom cruisers, solid Aluminum bodies.

But here's the kicker, he has ZERO employees. He didn't create a single job, with his multi-millions. Not a single person made an income working from him, because he did everything himself.

Now the left-wing would call that guy amazing, and brilliant, and he's making a killing, and rich and wealthy. Even though he's provided zero jobs to anyone.

Then you look at Walmart. Here's a guy who made hundreds of millions, by providing low cost goods to millions on millions of people across the nation.

At the same time, the Waltons have provided 2.2 Million jobs, and in addition an incalculable number of sub-contract jobs. But they are all evil and terrible, and exploiting.

The multi-millionaire that has provided no jobs, and only sells products to the super-rich....he's a good guy.

It's so backwards with the left. They celebrate those who have done little to benefit society, and attack those who have done the most.

 

[Andylusion]

Wow......Without the business owner we have...WHAT?
Business does not operate for "the needs of society"...Nor should it.
Products and services are made available through market research.
Your premise would suggest you would have government force business for instance to continue making manual typewriters.
After all, the people employed by the typewriter manufacturer "need" jobs.
Have you a problem with the concept of profit?

I disagree with the idea of profit in regards to capitalism.

What does that mean?
I'll ask it another way..
If not for the purpose of profit potential( there are no guarantees) then where would be the incentive to start a business?

Why not start a business, in a system where the concept of profit and exploiting others isn't seen as ok.

Because a business that doesn't make a profit, isn't in business anymore. Hostess is a perfect example. They had high labor costs, and went broke.

You don't hire people unless you make a profit from hiring them. If you actually lose money by hiring someone.... why would you hire them?

You prove the concept. You start a business where you don't profit or "exploit" anyone. Go do it. Stop b!tching about it, and do it yourself.

Of course you can't. And you won't.

Collectively owned production by workers? That's the BS of capitalism, the inherit exploition of many for the profit of a few or one

By all means, start your collectively owned auto factory. Where are you going to get the capital to pay for just the R&D to make your prototype? Good luck. I can't wait to hear of your success.

 

[Andylusion]

I disagree with the idea of profit in regards to capitalism.

What does that mean?
I'll ask it another way..
If not for the purpose of profit potential( there are no guarantees) then where would be the incentive to start a business?

Why not start a business, in a system where the concept of profit and exploiting others isn't seen as ok.

Because a business that doesn't make a profit, isn't in business anymore. Hostess is a perfect example. They had high labor costs, and went broke.

You don't hire people unless you make a profit from hiring them. If you actually lose money by hiring someone.... why would you hire them?

You prove the concept. You start a business where you don't profit or "exploit" anyone. Go do it. Stop b!tching about it, and do it yourself.

Of course you can't. And you won't.

What he's espousing is an economy run by govco where there are no owners only slaves of the government.

I want workers to control the government while it exists, and I want collective ownership of production.

Yeah, and people were starving to death in the Soviet Union. The Chinese collectives resulted in mass starvation that wiped out 100 million. Your system doesn't work. It's failed, and killed it's followers every single time it's been tried.

 

[Marxist]

I disagree with the idea of profit in regards to capitalism.

What does that mean?
I'll ask it another way..
If not for the purpose of profit potential( there are no guarantees) then where would be the incentive to start a business?

Why not start a business, in a system where the concept of profit and exploiting others isn't seen as ok.

Because a business that doesn't make a profit, isn't in business anymore. Hostess is a perfect example. They had high labor costs, and went broke.

You don't hire people unless you make a profit from hiring them. If you actually lose money by hiring someone.... why would you hire them?

You prove the concept. You start a business where you don't profit or "exploit" anyone. Go do it. Stop b!tching about it, and do it yourself.

Of course you can't. And you won't.

Collectively owned production by workers? That's the BS of capitalism, the inherit exploition of many for the profit of a few or one

By all means, start your collectively owned auto factory. Where are you going to get the capital to pay for just the R&D to make your prototype? Good luck. I can't wait to hear of your success.

That's the core of the problem, those who own capital are the ones who control the production and exploit others, the system is the problem.

 

[Marxist]

What does that mean?
I'll ask it another way..
If not for the purpose of profit potential( there are no guarantees) then where would be the incentive to start a business?

Why not start a business, in a system where the concept of profit and exploiting others isn't seen as ok.

Because a business that doesn't make a profit, isn't in business anymore. Hostess is a perfect example. They had high labor costs, and went broke.

You don't hire people unless you make a profit from hiring them. If you actually lose money by hiring someone.... why would you hire them?

You prove the concept. You start a business where you don't profit or "exploit" anyone. Go do it. Stop b!tching about it, and do it yourself.

Of course you can't. And you won't.

What he's espousing is an economy run by govco where there are no owners only slaves of the government.

I want workers to control the government while it exists, and I want collective ownership of production.

Yeah, and people were starving to death in the Soviet Union. The Chinese collectives resulted in mass starvation that wiped out 100 million. Your system doesn't work. It's failed, and killed it's followers every single time it's been tried.

Tens of millions died in famines under control of capitalist Britain, of course, we won't blame that. The Chinese collectivization was a failure due to the way Mao put forth his policies, it doesn't mean anything. LOL. 100 million died due to Chinese collectivization? Utter bullshit, they say the "communist" death toll is 100 million.. Keep spewing bullshit.

 

[Andylusion]

What does that mean?
I'll ask it another way..
If not for the purpose of profit potential( there are no guarantees) then where would be the incentive to start a business?

Why not start a business, in a system where the concept of profit and exploiting others isn't seen as ok.

Because a business that doesn't make a profit, isn't in business anymore. Hostess is a perfect example. They had high labor costs, and went broke.

You don't hire people unless you make a profit from hiring them. If you actually lose money by hiring someone.... why would you hire them?

You prove the concept. You start a business where you don't profit or "exploit" anyone. Go do it. Stop b!tching about it, and do it yourself.

Of course you can't. And you won't.

Collectively owned production by workers? That's the BS of capitalism, the inherit exploition of many for the profit of a few or one

By all means, start your collectively owned auto factory. Where are you going to get the capital to pay for just the R&D to make your prototype? Good luck. I can't wait to hear of your success.

That's the core of the problem, those who own capital are the ones who control the production and exploit others, the system is the problem.

Capital is dynamic. Even if they gave you all the Capital, how do you plan to maintain it? Multi-million dollar machines, take multi-million dollar maintenance.

When Castro gained control over the sugar cane fields, he stripped the wealthy capitalists of the fields, and gave them to government employees. The result was the fields produced a fraction of the sugar.

Similarly, when Venezuela stripped Exxon and other oil companies of their oil leases, and gave the fields to government employees, the production which had been increasing, began to decrease.

The wealthy capitalists, are wealthy because they know how to make the system work. When you put the system in the hands of idiots who don't know how to make the hard decisions, the result is always decline.

Even Stalin later in life, admitted that manager played an important role in running a company.

In Cuba, they stripped the buildings from land owners, and placed them under the control of government. Today, the infrastructure of Cuba is in shambles. Entire buildings fall into rubble on the streets of Cuba.

Cuba Building Collapse Leaves 4 Dead - Havana Times.org

Yes, those are plants growing inside the building.

Apartment building. Notice how many don't have windows.

But at least there are no capitalists making a profit off of this, right? This is your public ownership at work right here. In a country with a massive housing shortage.

 

[Mac1958]

.

Too late for Marxism, people have more self respect than that.

.

 

[Marxist]

Why not start a business, in a system where the concept of profit and exploiting others isn't seen as ok.

Because a business that doesn't make a profit, isn't in business anymore. Hostess is a perfect example. They had high labor costs, and went broke.

You don't hire people unless you make a profit from hiring them. If you actually lose money by hiring someone.... why would you hire them?

You prove the concept. You start a business where you don't profit or "exploit" anyone. Go do it. Stop b!tching about it, and do it yourself.

Of course you can't. And you won't.

Collectively owned production by workers? That's the BS of capitalism, the inherit exploition of many for the profit of a few or one

By all means, start your collectively owned auto factory. Where are you going to get the capital to pay for just the R&D to make your prototype? Good luck. I can't wait to hear of your success.

That's the core of the problem, those who own capital are the ones who control the production and exploit others, the system is the problem.

Capital is dynamic. Even if they gave you all the Capital, how do you plan to maintain it? Multi-million dollar machines, take multi-million dollar maintenance.

When Castro gained control over the sugar cane fields, he stripped the wealthy capitalists of the fields, and gave them to government employees. The result was the fields produced a fraction of the sugar.

Similarly, when Venezuela stripped Exxon and other oil companies of their oil leases, and gave the fields to government employees, the production which had been increasing, began to decrease.

The wealthy capitalists, are wealthy because they know how to make the system work. When you put the system in the hands of idiots who don't know how to make the hard decisions, the result is always decline.

Even Stalin later in life, admitted that manager played an important role in running a company.

In Cuba, they stripped the buildings from land owners, and placed them under the control of government. Today, the infrastructure of Cuba is in shambles. Entire buildings fall into rubble on the streets of Cuba.

Cuba Building Collapse Leaves 4 Dead - Havana Times.org

Yes, those are plants growing inside the building.

Apartment building. Notice how many don't have windows.

But at least there are no capitalists making a profit off of this, right? This is your public ownership at work right here. In a country with a massive housing shortage.

Ignore Cubas history and the improvements to quality of life for the average person, ignore that the previous profits in Venezuela went to the top on purpose, cherry pick rampantly. Multi million dollar maintenance as determined by the capitalists, who control the prices of everything.. Idiots? Oh please.

 

[Andylusion]

Why not start a business, in a system where the concept of profit and exploiting others isn't seen as ok.

Because a business that doesn't make a profit, isn't in business anymore. Hostess is a perfect example. They had high labor costs, and went broke.

You don't hire people unless you make a profit from hiring them. If you actually lose money by hiring someone.... why would you hire them?

You prove the concept. You start a business where you don't profit or "exploit" anyone. Go do it. Stop b!tching about it, and do it yourself.

Of course you can't. And you won't.

What he's espousing is an economy run by govco where there are no owners only slaves of the government.

I want workers to control the government while it exists, and I want collective ownership of production.

Yeah, and people were starving to death in the Soviet Union. The Chinese collectives resulted in mass starvation that wiped out 100 million. Your system doesn't work. It's failed, and killed it's followers every single time it's been tried.

Tens of millions died in famines under control of capitalist Britain, of course, we won't blame that. The Chinese collectivization was a failure due to the way Mao put forth his policies, it doesn't mean anything. LOL. 100 million died due to Chinese collectivization? Utter bullshit, they say the "communist" death toll is 100 million.. Keep spewing bullshit.

Was that a private control? Or a government control? Hint: The famines were caused by government regulation and control, not capitalism. Under a capitalist system, there would not have been a requirement to only harvest potatoes.

Yeah, if we believe only what the communists say about themselves, then only 20 Million died.... ever. That's the bull.

 

[Marxist]

.

Too late for Marxism, people have more self respect than that.

.

Yeah, millions disagree with you.

 

[Marxist]

Because a business that doesn't make a profit, isn't in business anymore. Hostess is a perfect example. They had high labor costs, and went broke.

You don't hire people unless you make a profit from hiring them. If you actually lose money by hiring someone.... why would you hire them?

You prove the concept. You start a business where you don't profit or "exploit" anyone. Go do it. Stop b!tching about it, and do it yourself.

Of course you can't. And you won't.

What he's espousing is an economy run by govco where there are no owners only slaves of the government.

I want workers to control the government while it exists, and I want collective ownership of production.

Yeah, and people were starving to death in the Soviet Union. The Chinese collectives resulted in mass starvation that wiped out 100 million. Your system doesn't work. It's failed, and killed it's followers every single time it's been tried.

Tens of millions died in famines under control of capitalist Britain, of course, we won't blame that. The Chinese collectivization was a failure due to the way Mao put forth his policies, it doesn't mean anything. LOL. 100 million died due to Chinese collectivization? Utter bullshit, they say the "communist" death toll is 100 million.. Keep spewing bullshit.

Was that a private control? Or a government control? Hint: The famines were caused by government regulation and control, not capitalism. Under a capitalist system, there would not have been a requirement to only harvest potatoes.

Yeah, if we believe only what the communists say about themselves, then only 20 Million died.... ever. That's the bull.

Ah, not like the rampant imperialism wasn't fueled by capitalists In Britain.. It's the usual course of the capitalist to deny this shit, then tell us we're stupid for not blaming a famine on an idea that hasn't existed yet. No communist that has a brain says only 20 million died.

 

[Andylusion]

Because a business that doesn't make a profit, isn't in business anymore. Hostess is a perfect example. They had high labor costs, and went broke.

You don't hire people unless you make a profit from hiring them. If you actually lose money by hiring someone.... why would you hire them?

You prove the concept. You start a business where you don't profit or "exploit" anyone. Go do it. Stop b!tching about it, and do it yourself.

Of course you can't. And you won't.

Collectively owned production by workers? That's the BS of capitalism, the inherit exploition of many for the profit of a few or one

By all means, start your collectively owned auto factory. Where are you going to get the capital to pay for just the R&D to make your prototype? Good luck. I can't wait to hear of your success.

That's the core of the problem, those who own capital are the ones who control the production and exploit others, the system is the problem.

Capital is dynamic. Even if they gave you all the Capital, how do you plan to maintain it? Multi-million dollar machines, take multi-million dollar maintenance.

When Castro gained control over the sugar cane fields, he stripped the wealthy capitalists of the fields, and gave them to government employees. The result was the fields produced a fraction of the sugar.

Similarly, when Venezuela stripped Exxon and other oil companies of their oil leases, and gave the fields to government employees, the production which had been increasing, began to decrease.

The wealthy capitalists, are wealthy because they know how to make the system work. When you put the system in the hands of idiots who don't know how to make the hard decisions, the result is always decline.

Even Stalin later in life, admitted that manager played an important role in running a company.

In Cuba, they stripped the buildings from land owners, and placed them under the control of government. Today, the infrastructure of Cuba is in shambles. Entire buildings fall into rubble on the streets of Cuba.

Cuba Building Collapse Leaves 4 Dead - Havana Times.org

Yes, those are plants growing inside the building.

Apartment building. Notice how many don't have windows.

But at least there are no capitalists making a profit off of this, right? This is your public ownership at work right here. In a country with a massive housing shortage.

Ignore Cubas history and the improvements to quality of life for the average person, ignore that the previous profits in Venezuela went to the top on purpose, cherry pick rampantly. Multi million dollar maintenance as determined by the capitalists, who control the prices of everything.. Idiots? Oh please.

There are no improvements. There is nothing to ignore. The Cubans are far worse off, in every aspect. Why do you think they were willing to risk death, to get to the evil capitalist controlled US, where they are supposedly exploited?

Capitalists don't control the price of anything. That's more Maxist ignorance. If the Capitalists could control the price, they'd be charging $1 Million for every bag of rice. They can't. No one can.

You are just making up excuses. More maxists lame excuses. Your system never works, always consistently fails, and you never learn, you just make up yet another excuse.

 

[Mac1958]

.

Too late for Marxism, people have more self respect than that.

.

Yeah, millions disagree with you.

Millions as compared to billions?

Yeah, I can see that.

And those millions don't have much self respect.

.

 

[Andylusion]

.

Too late for Marxism, people have more self respect than that.

.

Yeah, millions disagree with you.

Which is funny given most of the world, including former communists have moved towards capitalism.

 

[Andylusion]

What he's espousing is an economy run by govco where there are no owners only slaves of the government.

I want workers to control the government while it exists, and I want collective ownership of production.

Yeah, and people were starving to death in the Soviet Union. The Chinese collectives resulted in mass starvation that wiped out 100 million. Your system doesn't work. It's failed, and killed it's followers every single time it's been tried.

Tens of millions died in famines under control of capitalist Britain, of course, we won't blame that. The Chinese collectivization was a failure due to the way Mao put forth his policies, it doesn't mean anything. LOL. 100 million died due to Chinese collectivization? Utter bullshit, they say the "communist" death toll is 100 million.. Keep spewing bullshit.

Was that a private control? Or a government control? Hint: The famines were caused by government regulation and control, not capitalism. Under a capitalist system, there would not have been a requirement to only harvest potatoes.

Yeah, if we believe only what the communists say about themselves, then only 20 Million died.... ever. That's the bull.

Ah, not like the rampant imperialism wasn't fueled by capitalists In Britain.. It's the usual course of the capitalist to deny this shit, then tell us we're stupid for not blaming a famine on an idea that hasn't existed yet. No communist that has a brain says only 20 million died.

You are mixing unrelated things. Imperialism has nothing to do with either capitalism or socialism.

 

[Marxist]

I want workers to control the government while it exists, and I want collective ownership of production.

Yeah, and people were starving to death in the Soviet Union. The Chinese collectives resulted in mass starvation that wiped out 100 million. Your system doesn't work. It's failed, and killed it's followers every single time it's been tried.

Tens of millions died in famines under control of capitalist Britain, of course, we won't blame that. The Chinese collectivization was a failure due to the way Mao put forth his policies, it doesn't mean anything. LOL. 100 million died due to Chinese collectivization? Utter bullshit, they say the "communist" death toll is 100 million.. Keep spewing bullshit.

Was that a private control? Or a government control? Hint: The famines were caused by government regulation and control, not capitalism. Under a capitalist system, there would not have been a requirement to only harvest potatoes.

Yeah, if we believe only what the communists say about themselves, then only 20 Million died.... ever. That's the bull.

Ah, not like the rampant imperialism wasn't fueled by capitalists In Britain.. It's the usual course of the capitalist to deny this shit, then tell us we're stupid for not blaming a famine on an idea that hasn't existed yet. No communist that has a brain says only 20 million died.

You are mixing unrelated things. Imperialism has nothing to do with either capitalism or socialism.

Capitalists fuel imperialism.

 

[Edgetho]

.

Too late for Marxism, people have more self respect than that.

.

Yeah, millions disagree with you.

That's true.

Most of them are in North Korea, however.

scumbag

 

[Marxist]

Collectively owned production by workers? That's the BS of capitalism, the inherit exploition of many for the profit of a few or one

By all means, start your collectively owned auto factory. Where are you going to get the capital to pay for just the R&D to make your prototype? Good luck. I can't wait to hear of your success.

That's the core of the problem, those who own capital are the ones who control the production and exploit others, the system is the problem.

Capital is dynamic. Even if they gave you all the Capital, how do you plan to maintain it? Multi-million dollar machines, take multi-million dollar maintenance.

When Castro gained control over the sugar cane fields, he stripped the wealthy capitalists of the fields, and gave them to government employees. The result was the fields produced a fraction of the sugar.

Similarly, when Venezuela stripped Exxon and other oil companies of their oil leases, and gave the fields to government employees, the production which had been increasing, began to decrease.

The wealthy capitalists, are wealthy because they know how to make the system work. When you put the system in the hands of idiots who don't know how to make the hard decisions, the result is always decline.

Even Stalin later in life, admitted that manager played an important role in running a company.

In Cuba, they stripped the buildings from land owners, and placed them under the control of government. Today, the infrastructure of Cuba is in shambles. Entire buildings fall into rubble on the streets of Cuba.

Cuba Building Collapse Leaves 4 Dead - Havana Times.org

Yes, those are plants growing inside the building.

Apartment building. Notice how many don't have windows.

But at least there are no capitalists making a profit off of this, right? This is your public ownership at work right here. In a country with a massive housing shortage.

Ignore Cubas history and the improvements to quality of life for the average person, ignore that the previous profits in Venezuela went to the top on purpose, cherry pick rampantly. Multi million dollar maintenance as determined by the capitalists, who control the prices of everything.. Idiots? Oh please.

There are no improvements. There is nothing to ignore. The Cubans are far worse off, in every aspect. Why do you think they were willing to risk death, to get to the evil capitalist controlled US, where they are supposedly exploited?

Capitalists don't control the price of anything. That's more Maxist ignorance. If the Capitalists could control the price, they'd be charging $1 Million for every bag of rice. They can't. No one can.

You are just making up excuses. More maxists lame excuses. Your system never works, always consistently fails, and you never learn, you just make up yet another excuse.

No improvements? Look at the Cubans before Castro. The main ones who risked death were those affected by the land seizures, the upper classes.. Exploitation, by concept, in regards to this, follows that a laborer is paid much less then what is labor is worth, or what he produces, which is the very nature of capitalism. Capitalists do control the price, but they are realistic about it, don't be an idiot and throw out the 1 million bull shit. Oh yeah, not like Cuba has gone through the special period, U.S. Hatred and blockades, the embargo.. Not excuses, you need to grow up and redefine "works" since the USSR worked.. By many means.

 

[Edgetho]

Capitalists fuel imperialism.

Lying scumbag.

The USSR and red China were THE most Imperialist countries on earth in the 20th Century.

And National Socialism was (guess what National SOCIALISM was, scumbag)