Kid lemonade stand = bourgie?

[marl]

Child owns the means of production and employs proles: ✓ check
Uses C-M (commodity to money): ✓ check
Produces a surplus value (albeit a small one): ✓ check
*Exploits labor: ✓ check


Anyone want to shoot this down? It's an argument my friend made against the term bourgeoisie.

[Drosophila]

yea omg

[Luc]

What child's lemonade stand employs anyone but the child itself???

[marl]

I'd appreciate a response more than 'it's a kid, lol'. There's got to be more to it.

[bad ideas actualised by alcohol]

Who does the kid exploit?

[Caj]

Since when do kids employ "proles" at their lemonade stands?

[marl]

Who does the kid exploit?

Since when do kids employ "proles" at their lemonade stands?

Their mother/father.

[Luc]

I'd appreciate a response more than 'it's a kid, lol'. There's got to be more to it.

well if the kid doesn't employ anyone it's not a bourgeois...

maybe petite-bourgeois (self employment?)

[Drosophila]

I'd appreciate a response more than 'it's a kid, lol'. There's got to be more to it.

Tell this guy that trying to define who's bourgeois and who's proletarian is irrelevant. It's between oppressive and oppressed.

[TheRedAnarchist23]

Their mother/father.

facepalm!

[The Jay]

If the kid employs other kids then yes. If they split the profits evenly, then it's a co-operative.

[bad ideas actualised by alcohol]

Their mother/father.

How?

[Zav]

I have never seen a kid running a lemonade stand that actually employed anyone, but I'm sure it happens. Actually I haven't seen a lemonade stand in years. Technically a kid doing that is part of the bourgeoisie if they become bosses, as innocent as you want said kid to be. I'd give you a counter-argument if I had one, but I can't think of one. What were the circumstances of the argument? Was it that kids can't be bourgy or that 'bourgeois' is an inadequate adjective?

Edit: The hell did all you people come from? There was one post when I clicked reply. MAGIC!

[Luc]

Their mother/father.

they don't pay them though.

Perhaps you can get into discussion on exploitation of free labour of women but then it's no longer about class

(father too if that's the case but I don't think its structural anymore :unsure:...

[marl]

What were the circumstances of the argument? Was it that kids can't be bourgy or that 'bourgeois' is an inadequate adjective?

I said the term 'bourgeoisie' while talking to a friend and he said it was an outdated term.

[Anarcho-Brocialist]

NO! I can call the cops and have them arrested for not being health inspected, owning a business license, doesn't pay payroll taxes, sales tax, nor small business tax. Operation is closed and then they owe the IRS more than what their surplus-value was.

[NewLeft]

The kid on his own is a petit-bourgeois. The term has to do with his relation, nothing else.

[Zav]

I said the term 'bourgeoisie' while talking to a friend and he said it was an updated term.
You mean 'outdated'? It's old, but it still applies and there isn't a better one, so no, it isn't outdated by definition. Ask your friend to speak with words invented in only the last century and laugh as ze struggles with it.

[marl]

You mean 'outdated'? It's old, but it still applies and there isn't a better one, so no, it isn't outdated by definition.

Yeah, I made a typo.

[Railyon]

What child's lemonade stand employs anyone but the child itself???

You never watched The Boondocks, rite. Season 1, episode 14. Shit was hilarious.

[Luc]

You never watched The Boondocks, rite. Season 1, episode 14. Shit was hilarious.

Got into it shortly before it was cancelled so hadn't seen much :(

[marl]

What he's referring to:
xjMutF_jnrU

[Luc]

What he's referring to:
xjMutF_jnrU

:laugh:

[Nox]

Kill the bourgie scum while they're still young!!

/sarcasm

[The Jay]

That show was way too good to be cancelled.

[Ostrinski]

Technically yes.

[Robespierres Neck]

Tell this guy that trying to define who's bourgeois and who's proletarian is irrelevant. It's between oppressive and oppressed.

If the kid employs other kids then yes. If they split the profits evenly, then it's a co-operative.

Yes.

[Revolution starts with U]

Yes, if a 12 year old hires wage labor of which he extracts surplus value he is a bourgeois oppressor. So? Do you think there weren't 12 year old kings in feudal times?

[TheGodlessUtopian]

I think the OP has their question answered and as the quality of discussion,while funny,is degrading I think it is time this thread be done with. So, should I close it or move it to Chit Chat?

[Robespierres Neck]

What if he got some seeds from a lemon, planted and grew a tree in his yard, and used the lemons he picked from this tree as his means to make the lemonade?

[marl]

I think the OP has their question answered and as the quality of discussion,while funny,is degrading I think it is time this thread be done with. So, should I close it or move it to Chit Chat?

Indeed, it's been answered. Go ahead and close it.

[tachosomoza]

Destroy the petty bourgeois lemonade capitalists in training!! Today's lemonade capitalists are tomorrow's venture capitalists!! :laugh:

[Lev Bronsteinovich]

Is this for real? This lemonade stand, it actually makes enough money for the kid and the mother and father to keep body and soul together? It's a game, pretend for pete's sake. On a real scale, if someone owns a store and employs a few people, they are not necessarily bourgeois, more likely, petite bourgeois.

[Lobotomy]

I mean, I guess. kids learn the dynamics of capitalism at very young ages in all sorts of ways, so I don't see why this is particularly noteworthy.

[Sea]

Child owns the means of production and employs proles: ✓ check
Uses C-M (commodity to money): ✓ check
Produces a surplus value (albeit a small one): ✓ Hardly, when the parents supply the lemon juice, pitcher, sugar, etc. The
*Exploits labor: ✓ Nope. I can pretty much guarantee you a kid's parent(s) "working" at the kid's stand would be volunteering.


Anyone want to shoot this down? It's an argument my friend made against the term bourgeoisie.

Your friend's argument uses the same logic as saying that anyone that has a cat and lets others pet it qualifies as the proprietor of a no-charge zoo.

[TheGodlessUtopian]

Indeed, it's been answered. Go ahead and close it.

Thread Closed.