| o_O.Q said: 1. really? you've never seen people support a bully? your whole argument here is flawed because exploitation happens across all levels in a society
2. and that is why we have law and police 3. but i think you're getting a bit ridiculous if you imply that a business owner giving someone a job is worthy of being attacked because he doesn't give that employee all of his profits and i think that's where you're going with this 4. since people are as we have discussed different in a multitude of ways... dome people tend to be more capable of defending themselves than others 5. how do you address the limitations women for example have with this idea? 6. i think we can agree that women are generally weaker than men and are more susceptible to harm from men.. that problem is address by having the state... what would propose as a substitute? are you for gun control btw? 7. ....um are you being serious right now? 8. do you accept that people have varying levels of intelligence, drive, creativity etc etc etc?.. if you do... why ask such a ridiculous question? 9. some people are better at leading than other people... do you agree with that?
10. no i don't think so i do sincerely think they believe that and that's why its a nonsensical ideology and to be frank i'm seeing some connections to what you are posting right now
11. look... you yourself stated that the problem with capitalism is that its the use of capital to obtain labour the point is that you yourself exchange capital for labour how does store owner or mason or whatever you bought up before get their tools or shelves or whatever? though the use of capital in exchange for labour
12. that's a lie, if you truly wanted to you could go live in the woods off the land you wouldn't be the first and you wouldn't be the last either no one is forcing anyone to live within civilisation people willingly participate and provide their labour in exchange for the comforts that civilisation provides such as electricity, running water etc etc etc
13. so how would you get your water and electricity?
14. the state... and everyone benefits... which is why the state exists to begin with.... 15. situations like bailouts like what happened in 2008 i would agree should never occur
"The difference between Steve Jobs and his investors is that his investors had the capital whereas he had the idea. " 16. you're evading my question " so... the only difference between steve jobs and you is that he has money?"
" Why couldn't he had just used his ideas and savviness with a bunch of like-minded persons and create an Apple without investors?" 17. uh he did? apple started with him creating things in his garage
" The market demand still exists." 18. new ideas create new demand for what is produced by those ideas... you're taking the kart and putting it all down the road from the horse
" Your entire premise was to equivocate value production/wealth creation and exploitation, when the two aren't one in the same." i didn't say that... so why are you saying that i said that? 19. furthermore you think that someone voluntarily working for someone is automatically being exploited and to be frank to me that's batshit insane |
1. In egalitarian institutions where bullies are weeded out, and everyone is treated as equals? No. In hierarchical institutions like state schools? Yes. Yes, exploitation happens on all levels in our current society. That says nothing about whether or not it would happen in an alternative society. That is the point, duh!
2. Law and police are mechanisms of exploitation much more than they are mechanisms to prevent it.
3. Who said anything about attacking a employer? I will just tell him that I am keeping my labor-product, and if he attacks me I will react defensively. It's not the workers, renters, etc who do the attacking. It's not the they who do the evicting. The capitalist could either join us or leave us alone. If he wants reparations for his part in securing the capital, I'd and most socialists would agree to it, but only the part he contributed.
4. Weapons have been a great equalizer, and no individual can last long against many individuals.
5. Women can shoot guns. You wouldn't last too long if you were trying to attack my grandmother, for example. She's been shooting guns since she was a little girl.
6. That problem is addressed by having good people around you, and by obtaining weapons. And nope, I am very much against gun control, as much as you can be.
7. Yes, I am asking if the differences in the ability to manage a business are due to education and other social factors or if they are inherent as you suggested. Do you have any empirical data showing the latter?
8. Sure, but I don't think intelligence, creativity, etc follow a power distribution like wealth does. If these things were the only things rewarded wealth inequality would be reduced considerably. You'll have to provide me with evidence that capitalist are in the top 1% of these things. I highly doubt that is the case.
9. Leadership and management are very different things. Leadership doesn't imply alienating my autonomy, having a manager does. Leadership is about showing people how do to something, management is about telling them how to do something.
10. Do you support women having the same rights as men? If so, why?
11. I actually didn't. I said the problem with capitalism is the exploitation of another's labor by using state-privileges which benefit those who have large accumulation of capital. The problem isn't the existence of capital itself, or exchanging it for labor, but the system which disproportionately benefits the owners of capital and gives them more bargaining power which allows them to exploit the labor of others with little recourse.
12. Actually nope. If I lived in the woods, as you suggest, the state would kick me out for using "public land." Civilization predates capitalism and will postdate capitalism, so I don't know why you equivocated the two, well besides not having much knowledge about what is meant by capitalism, of course.
13. The same way I currently get it. Workers would use their labor in the same way they currently do, and I will pay them for their services. Utility cooperatives already exist in our current society, despite the disadvantages placed on them by the system.
14. Did the Native Americans whose land was stolen benefit? If you say no, then obviously everyone doesn't benefit. And for those whom do benefit, they benefit disproportionately. Some benefit from the state's subsidies more than others, and this creates unnatural inequalities.
15. Yet they do.
16. I am actually not. Your question was based on faulty premise, that it was Steve Jobs that had the money. It wasn't Steve Jobs that had the money, it was the venture capitalists and stock-buyers whom invested in his ideas that did. Steve Jobs was a worker (in that context) like the rest of us.
17. And it didn't grow until people invested in it. You can't ignore the investors in this equation. https://www.investopedia.com/university/steve-jobs-biography/steve-jobs-success-story.asp
"Just as importantly, their company had received seed capital from early investors"
There are plenty of people just as intelligent and capable as Steve Jobs at innovating who don't 1. have an education and/or 2. have investors to invest in them. Having wealth =|= being intelligent.
18. And why wouldn't the workers have ideas about how to create a new product that they expect will have demand?
19. Somebody voluntarily working for somebody else isn't wrong. But! Under the conditions which the state imposes, there is nothing voluntary about it. All alternatives are restricted by state laws and regulations so as to be nonviable, except for employment. So even though I have a choice among employers, the state through violence restricted my options to choose something other than employment, and therefore it is a less voluntary situation than if the state did not do such things or if it did not exist at all.
