Opinions on small business?

[Schumpeter]

I'm a student but I run a small business on the side with my friend, we own two vans which we converted to sell fast food (e.g burgers, hot dogs or fish and chips), these we(well I) use to market our goods at events (paying the organizers commission), usually we will run one, we split the profit however we recently purchased another and we have a Romanian immigrant working for us in the other van, he gets paid below the 'living wage' (though he only works a few hours on sat or sun, he has a job Mon-Friday).

Would you object to this and what/why specifically please. Perhaps you can convince me to change my operations.

[Criminalize Heterosexuality]

The point of communism is not to convince you to "change your operation" - communism is not a church and we are not concerned about the salvation of your soul - but to lead the proletariat in overthrowing all forms of private property and wage labor, including your van business.

[Schumpeter]

The point of communism is not to convince you to "change your operation" - communism is not a church and we are not concerned about the salvation of your soul - but to lead the proletariat in overthrowing all forms of private property and wage labor, including your van business.

Whats so wrong with it? Would you prefer me to sell my vans sit at home and suck my dick?

[Slavic]

I'm a student but I run a small business on the side with my friend, we own two vans which we converted to sell fast food (e.g burgers, hot dogs or fish and chips), these we(well I) use to market our goods at events (paying the organizers commission), usually we will run one, we split the profit however we recently purchased another and we have a Romanian immigrant working for us in the other van, he gets paid below the 'living wage' (though he only works a few hours on sat or sun, he has a job Mon-Friday).

Would you object to this and what/why specifically please. Perhaps you can convince me to change my operations.

So you are breaking the current capitalist's laws in order to further exploit your workers?

[Schumpeter]

So you are breaking the current capitalist's laws in order to further exploit your workers?

I'm not breaking any laws

[Criminalize Heterosexuality]

Whats so wrong with it? Would you prefer me to sell my vans sit at home and suck my dick?

Again, what you do under the capitalist mode of production as an individual is no concern of communists. We "would prefer" that private property be abolished, which includes your van, but is not limited to it.

[Slavic]

I'm not breaking any laws

You stated you pay him below the "living wage", I am to understand that as you paying your worker less then the mandated minimum wage in your country.

[Schumpeter]

Again, what you do under the capitalist mode of production as an individual is no concern of communists. We "would prefer" that private property be abolished, which includes your van, but is not limited to it.

I'm asking why, comprehension not your strong point?

[Schumpeter]

You stated you pay him below the "living wage", I am to understand that as you paying your worker less then the mandated minimum wage in your country.

No, the Min wage is below the living wage, government subsidizes low paid workers by adding to their pay packet. The living wage is a different proposal.

[Criminalize Heterosexuality]

I'm asking why, comprehension not your strong point?

Why? Because it's in our class interest that your van be expropriated, among other things. Don't expect a sermon. There are conflicting classes in society, and communists are those who take the side of the proletariat against other classes and groups. Greed, as they say, is good. Well, communist proletarians are not satisfied with selflessly working in order to enrich the bourgeoisie and the petite bourgeoisie.

[Marshal of the People]

we have a Romanian immigrant working for us in the other van, he gets paid below the 'living wage'

However much I may hate comrade Stalin he had the right idea about how to deal with people like you! Capitalist scum!

P.S. I don't think Stalin was a comrade, I only call him one because I think it sounds funny.

[Schumpeter]

However much I may hate comrade Stalin he had the right idea about how to deal with people like you! Capitalist scum!

P.S. I don't think Stalin was a comrade, I only call him one because I think it sounds funny.

You don't get it do you. The dude works not because he has to, he could sit on JSA and survive, but because he wants to make a living for himself, he has aspiration and you are attempting to destroy this aspiration, destroy his source of income,his family's income, you should frankly be ashamed of yourself by making such a contemptible statement. Disgusting

[Marshal of the People]

You don't get it do you. The dude works not because he has to, he could sit on JSA and survive, but because he wants to make a living for himself, he has aspiration and you are attempting to destroy this aspiration, destroy his source of income,his family's income, you should frankly be ashamed of yourself by making such a contemptible statement. Disgusting

Pay him the full value of his labour and stop exploiting him and I would have no problem!

[Criminalize Heterosexuality]

Pay him the full value of his labour and stop exploiting him and I would have no problem!

That sounds like the "Ricardian socialism" of old - the problem with capitalism isn't that it is unjust, it's that it is unstable and holds back the development of the productive forces.

[Marshal of the People]

That sounds like the "Ricardian socialism" of old - the problem with capitalism isn't that it is unjust, it's that it is unstable and holds back the development of the productive forces.

I think we may have a misunderstanding.

In no way do I think that in a capitalist society the workers will be paid fairly, it goes against the entire point of capitalism and would create even more contradictions not to mention the bourgeois would not be happy because they would lose almost all all of their wealth and all of their power.

[Schumpeter]

Pay him the full value of his labour and stop exploiting him and I would have no problem!

How would you determine his labour value, what would you say selling/cooking burgers should pay for an hours work?

[Schumpeter]

I think we may have a misunderstanding.

In no way do I think that in a capitalist society the workers will be paid fairly, it goes against the entire point of capitalism and would create even more contradictions not to mention the bourgeois would not be happy because they would lose almost all all of their wealth and all of their power.

That would mean that that my burger vans would have to be nationalized.
Think about this, take a step back. Are you serious?

[Criminalize Heterosexuality]

That would mean that that my burger vans would have to be nationalized.
Think about this, take a step back. Are you serious?

Expropriated, not nationalized. In the event of a socialist revolution, you really shouldn't hold your breath hoping for any sort of compensation.

[Marshal of the People]

That would mean that that my burger vans would have to be nationalized.
Think about this, take a step back. Are you serious?

Your burger vans would be publicly owned for the good of society not your wallet!

[Schumpeter]

Expropriated, not nationalized. In the event of a socialist revolution, you really shouldn't hold your breath hoping for any sort of compensation.

I'll be laughing all the way to the bank, your socialist revolution is never going to catch me.

Enjoy your second grade pussy, second grade job, second grade lifestyle, you Marxist degenerate. There won't be any socialist revolution in your lifetime, socialism is near enough dead.

[Schumpeter]

Your burger vans would be publicly owned for the good of society not your wallet!

How would nationalized burger vans know where to supply their services without the profit motive, if they wrongly allocate their resources the result would be a net welfare loss to society, e.g the USSR producing shit loads of boots that nobody wanted.

[Ele'ill]

I'll be laughing all the way to the bank

how's that working out for you so far

[Marshal of the People]

I'll be laughing all the way to the bank, your socialist revolution is never going to catch me.

Enjoy your second grade pussy, second grade job, second grade lifestyle, you Marxist degenerate. There won't be any socialist revolution in your lifetime, socialism is near enough dead.

I wouldn't count on it!

[Marshal of the People]

how's that working out for you so far

He'll be bankrupt within a year!

[Sinister Intents]

I'll be laughing all the way to the bank, your socialist revolution is never going to catch me.

Enjoy your second grade pussy, second grade job, second grade lifestyle, you Marxist degenerate. There won't be any socialist revolution in your lifetime, socialism is near enough dead.

Well that escalated quickly moron. Please explain you use of the word pussy? Show me how socialism is dead? Are you a sexist?

[Schumpeter]

Well that escalated quickly moron. Please explain you use of the word pussy? Show me how socialism is dead? Are you a sexist?

Pussy as in girls, as girls like money (IN GENERAL) . Yes I like to fuck, that doesn't make me sexist.

[Marshal of the People]

Pussy as in girls, as girls like money (IN GENERAL) . Yes I like to fuck, that doesn't make me sexist.

You are going to be banned soon.

[Sinister Intents]

Pussy as in girls, as girls like money (IN GENERAL) . Yes I like to fuck, that doesn't make me sexist.

So you objectify women? Fuck you :cursing: women aren't fucking objects, they're human beings.

[Marshal of the People]

So you objectify women? Fuck you :cursing: women aren't fucking objects, they're human beings.

Conservatives! They are not the smartest or most logical ideology.

[Ele'ill]

Pussy as in girls, as girls like money (IN GENERAL) . Yes I like to fuck, that doesn't make me sexist.

your troll game is weak

[Criminalize Heterosexuality]

I don't know what's funnier, the implication that I'm interested in women, or the implication that Schumpeter, the poster, not the very dead bourgeois economist, has a healthy, active and fulfilling sex life with his attitude.

[Schumpeter]

So you objectify women? Fuck you :cursing: women aren't fucking objects, they're human beings.

Yeah an I have sex with human beings? So what If i derive value from sex? Same way in which I'd pay a prostitute, you got a problem with those also? I wouldn't be suprised, Marxists are so fucking boring

[Tim Cornelis]

Evidently, we wouldn't be destroying his source of income. We would socialise it. I don't see why you need to get your knicks in a twist about a communist telling you he advocates communism on a communist forum -- after your own inquiry no less. We object to your arrangement because we object to private property, it's as simple as that and not wholly unexpected now is it?

Ignore Marshal of the People being edgy though.

Also @Marshal of the People
Production is a socialised process and it is impossible to determine the full value created by an individual labourer, and presumably even undesirable due to the huge discrepancy. In communism using labour credits, productive members will receive no more than 40% of the value they create for personal consumption.

[Sinister Intents]

Conservatives! They are not the smartest or most logical ideology.

I eat conservatives, I reported his post

[Ele'ill]

Marxists are so fucking boring

you haven't been on the forum long enough to know exactly how true this is

[Schumpeter]

I don't know what's funnier, the implication that I'm interested in women, or the implication that Schumpeter, the poster, not the very dead bourgeois economist, has a healthy, active and fulfilling sex life with his attitude.

The world is full to the brim with narcissists and run by borderline psychopaths, the world is full of sharks and you're going to get eaten up if you don't realize that. So stop being a little prick, most of the guys in my econ class get plenty. Only Marxists hate economists as Marxists don't accept any ethical principles as Marxism is essentially a religion.

[Criminalize Heterosexuality]

you haven't been on the forum long enough to know exactly how true this is

You should have seen the last COMECON Cybernetics Experiments Appreciation Society annual party. I still can't stand the taste of goat blood.


The world is full to the brim with narcissists and run by borderline psychopaths, the world is full of sharks and you're going to get eaten up if you don't realize that. So stop being a little prick, most of the guys in my econ class get plenty. Only Marxists hate economists as Marxists don't accept any ethical principles as Marxism is essentially a religion.

Well aren't you an endless font of life wisdom. You should charge money for your services. And Marxists don't accept ethical principles because Marxism is not a religion, and we are not interested in being Good, but in social change.

[Schumpeter]

Evidently, we wouldn't be destroying his source of income. We would socialise it. I don't see why you need to get your knicks in a twist about a communist telling you he advocates communism on a communist forum -- after your own inquiry no less. We object to your arrangement because we object to private property, it's as simple as that and not wholly unexpected now is it?

Ignore Marshal of the People being edgy though.

Also @Marshal of the People
Production is a socialised process and it is impossible to determine the full value created by an individual labourer, and presumably even undesirable due to the huge discrepancy. In communism using labour credits, productive members will receive no more than 40% of the value they create for personal consumption.

In the long run no more burger entrepreneurs = no more industry so you would get stagnation over time.

[Sinister Intents]

Yeah an I have sex with human beings? So what If i derive value from sex? Same way in which I'd pay a prostitute, you got a problem with those also? I wouldn't be suprised, Marxists are so fucking boring

Well I like sex with women to but I look at women with dignity, love, and respect. Not as something to fuck or abuse. I think you're a daft asshole. You disgust me beyond the expression of words cappie scum. I have no problem with sex work, I have a problem with women being forced and coerced into sex work so their labor can be exploited.

[Schumpeter]

Well I like sex with women to but I look at women with dignity, love, and respect. Not as something to fuck or abuse. I think you're a daft asshole. You disgust me beyond the expression of words cappie scum. I have no problem with sex work, I have a problem with women being forced and coerced into sex work so their labor can be exploited.

Cool then you should have no problem with me deriving pleasure from sexual organs and hence value from women due to their ability to have sex. Better pussy = better sex, obviously.

[Ele'ill]

In the long run no more burger entrepreneurs = no more industry so you would get stagnation over time.

Yeah, but when you really think about it we'll all be vegan anyways so no worries.

[Schumpeter]

You should have seen the last COMECON Cybernetics Experiments Appreciation Society annual party. I still can't stand the taste of goat blood.



Well aren't you an endless font of life wisdom. You should charge money for your services. And Marxists don't accept ethical principles because Marxism is not a religion, and we are not interested in being Good, but in social change.

"We're not interested in being good" Sounds like the words of Satan himself.

[Marshal of the People]

Cool then you should have no problem with me deriving pleasure from sexual organs and hence value from women due to their ability to have sex. Better pussy = better sex, obviously.

Please stop being sexist, you are making me feel sick.

[Criminalize Heterosexuality]

Yeah, but when you really think about it we'll all be vegan anyways so no worries.

Maybe we can grind up entrepreneurs to make burgers.


Cool then you should have no problem with me deriving pleasure from sexual organs and hence value from women due to their ability to have sex. Better pussy = better sex, obviously.

Oh you poor cherry boy. Here is some unsolicited life advice from me, for once: once you stop viewing women as walking fleshlights, your chance to have sex with them will increase somewhat.

This thread is a riot.


"We're not interested in being good" Sounds like the words of Satan himself.

You're making me blush.

[Tim Cornelis]

In the long run no more burger entrepreneurs = no more industry so you would get stagnation over time.

Which presumes the existence of capitalism, which, believe it or not, we, as communists, do not.

[Schumpeter]

Yeah, but when you really think about it we'll all be vegan anyways so no worries.

Debating with whiskey doesn't work, I'm going to bed. Night lefty was nice ranting at each other.

*hugs n kisses*

you guys don't get emotional over politics right? So we can still be friends innit?

[Sinister Intents]

Cool then you should have no problem with me deriving pleasure from sexual organs and hence value from women due to their ability to have sex. Better pussy = better sex, obviously.

You have no fucking idea how much of a fucking problem I have with everything you're saying scum :cursing: do you consider women inferior daftie? You're disgusting.

[Marshal of the People]

"We're not interested in being good" Sounds like the words of Satan himself.

But, but, but being good is no fun.

[Schumpeter]

Which presumes the existence of capitalism, which, believe it or not, we, as communists, do not.

This is beyond belief, you can't socialize capitalist industry without capitalism ( you were referring to socializing the burger van). SO capitalism in your example already exists.

[Schumpeter]

You have no fucking idea how much of a fucking problem I have with everything you're saying scum :cursing: do you consider women inferior daftie? You're disgusting.

No, I wouldn't fuck a man would I? So obviously women are better at sex (for me gays would differ). We're on the subject of sex btw, so I'm not talking generally.

[Marshal of the People]

No, I wouldn't fuck a man would I? So obviously women are better at sex (for me gays would differ). We're on the subject of sex btw, so I'm not talking generally.

Your disgusting, valuing a woman on their ability to sexually please you, yuck!

[rylasasin]

Petty Bourgeoisie is petty.

[Ele'ill]

No, I wouldn't fuck a man would I?


Would you?

[Tim Cornelis]

This is beyond belief, you can't socialize capitalist industry without capitalism ( you were referring to socializing the burger van). SO capitalism in your example already exists.

This reveals an ignorance of socialism. We want to socialise productive resources, for them to become common property. All means and instruments for the production of wealth for society will be owned by society. At that point, obviously, it ceased to be capitalist industry.


Your disgusting, valuing a woman on their ability to sexually please you, yuck!

You're*

Do you respond this fiercely toward any sexism you encounter in your daily life?

[Ele'ill]

good thread, bookmarked

[Comrade Chernov]

>implying all women have a vagina
>implying everyone with a vagina is a woman

This guy's quite a piece of work.

[Sinister Intents]

No, I wouldn't fuck a man would I? So obviously women are better at sex (for me gays would differ). We're on the subject of sex btw, so I'm not talking generally.

You homophobic piece of shit and you're A sexist moron. If I could fucking ban you I would. Suffer dumbass.

[Taters]

I'm a student but I run a small business on the side with my friend, we own two vans which we converted to sell fast food (e.g burgers, hot dogs or fish and chips), these we(well I) use to market our goods at events (paying the organizers commission), usually we will run one, we split the profit however we recently purchased another and we have a Romanian immigrant working for us in the other van, he gets paid below the 'living wage' (though he only works a few hours on sat or sun, he has a job Mon-Friday).

Would you object to this and what/why specifically please. Perhaps you can convince me to change my operations.

I'll steal all your shit.
Wait.
I mean expropriate.

[Marshal of the People]

Do you respond this fiercely toward any sexism you encounter in your daily life?

I don't know if that is a personal attack or an honest question so I will answer anyway. Yes I do respond to sexism in everyday life (I wouldn't use the word fiercely because that implies aggression), why wouldn’t I? Do you for some reason think I am sexist? If so why?

[Criminalize Heterosexuality]

good thread, bookmarked

Let us Make This Thread The Longest One on Revleft In Accordance With the Socialist Lifestyle.


This is beyond belief, you can't socialize capitalist industry without capitalism ( you were referring to socializing the burger van). SO capitalism in your example already exists.

Without capitalism there is no capitalist private property to socialise. But being socialised, the productive assets that were formerly private property follow different laws - the laws of motion of the mode of production change.

[Tim Cornelis]

Sinister Intents, the same question for you. Do you respond this fiercely to any sexism or homophobia in your daily life? Because that exists in abundance and I can't imagine you flipping your shit like that multiple times on a daily basis. It just feels insincere and forced. Challenging everyday, casual sexism and homophobia is fine, but there's no need to be hysterical about it.

[Marshal of the People]

Sinister Intents, the same question for you. Do you respond this fiercely to any sexism or homophobia in your daily lives? Because that exists in abundance and I can't imagine you flipping your shit like that multiple times on a daily basis. It just feels insincere and forced. Challenging sexism and homophobia is fine, but there's no need to be hysterical about it.

I am sorry if we appeared too concerned about sexism and homophobia for you.

[Sinister Intents]

Sinister Intents, the same question for you. Do you respond this fiercely to any sexism or homophobia in your daily life? Because that exists in abundance and I can't imagine you flipping your shit like that multiple times on a daily basis. It just feels insincere and forced. Challenging everyday, casual sexism and homophobia is fine, but there's no need to be hysterical about it.

I deal with it every fucking day :cursing: I can't stand it and I'm so sick of it, and yes I have been calling people on their absolute bullshit in real life. I can't stand this shit anymore and seriously I may start fucking hitting people in real life because of it.

[Marshal of the People]

I deal with it every fucking day :cursing: I can't stand it and I'm so sick of it, and yes I have been calling people on their absolute bullshit in real life. I can't stand this shit anymore and seriously I may start fucking hitting people in real life because of it.

I know I can't stand it either I seriously feel like killing sexist, racist and homophobic people!

[Criminalize Heterosexuality]

Sinister Intents, the same question for you. Do you respond this fiercely to any sexism or homophobia in your daily life? Because that exists in abundance and I can't imagine you flipping your shit like that multiple times on a daily basis. It just feels insincere and forced. Challenging everyday, casual sexism and homophobia is fine, but there's no need to be hysterical about it.

Well, it is certainly possible to be fierce in these situations. In fact the only reason I'm not is because Schtrumpfie made the "communist degenerate" comment about me, and I don't want to appear mad over that. But I don't think it has anything to do with insincerity - some people simply have a gut reaction against these things, which is in itself a good thing, I think.

[Tim Cornelis]

I am sorry if we appeared too concerned about sexism and homophobia for you.

Expressing concern about sexism is not the issue now is it? I just can't see you two turning red faced ( :cursing: ) and screaming at someone in a cafeteria when he says "I got so much pussy last night bro". Everyday sexism is so... everyday and casual that flipping your shit at it each time not something I see anyone do. Why can't you just say, "reducing women to their genitalia is inappropriate and dehumanising". It gets the point across more effectively.


I know I can't stand it either I seriously feel like killing sexist, racist and homophobic people!

Yeah I don't buy that.


I deal with it every fucking day :cursing: I can't stand it and I'm so sick of it, and yes I have been calling people on their absolute bullshit in real life. I can't stand this shit anymore and seriously I may start fucking hitting people in real life because of it.

I don't buy that either. Unless you're telling me that you scream at people in public on a daily basis and alienated all your (non-political) friends, which I find highly unlikely.

[Sinister Intents]

Expressing concern about sexism is not the issue now is it? I just can't see you two turning red faced ( :cursing: ) and screaming at someone in a cafeteria when he says "I got so much pussy last night bro". Everyday sexism is so... everyday and casual that flipping your shit at it each time not something I see anyone do. Why can't you just say, "reducing women to their genitalia is inappropriate and dehumanising". It gets the point across more effectively.

I get what you're saying, but if you knew how much I have to deal with this bullshit you would be in the same position as I am. I have zero tolerance to it and I'm not going to be letting people go for it. I will call people out on it and talk to them about it and if they get beligerant I'll either report their behavior or deal with it personally.

[Marshal of the People]

Yeah I don't buy that.

I don't care if you don't buy that but it is the truth. Everyone is different and has different reactions to stuff like this plus I definitely have psychopathic tendencies (I probably am one according to my psychologist).

[Criminalize Heterosexuality]

I don't buy that either. Unless you're telling me that you scream at people in public on a daily basis and alienated all your (non-political) friends, which I find highly unlikely.

Well, I don't think I've ever screamed, but I certainly won't hold back the comments about how disgusting bigots are, and I didn't have non-political friends (or rather, "mildly" bigoted friends) in the first place. So it's obviously possible.

[Sperm-Doll Setsuna]

Well, well, maybe calm down a little bit over here, not feed the shitstorm this troll has been fuelling (how many threads of these have we had? "I am a capitalist I run so and so small business, wut you lefties gonna do about it, huh?".

Also issued infraction to Schumpter for the repeated use of "pussy" and generally distasteful sexism.

[Criminalize Heterosexuality]

He explicitly clarified this was with regard to sex and not generally, so I really don't see one problem with it. You're hysterical.

The problem is that, asked about the worth of women, he immediately starts to talk about their sexuality. Not to mention the rape-y stuff about "having a lot of pussy" due to his wealth (but that was probably the poor old boy's fantasy).

[Marshal of the People]

I'll concede the first point, but the claim he was in any way making an apologia for rape is entirely unfounded.

I don't think anyone claimed that.

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

I'll be laughing all the way to the bank, your socialist revolution is never going to catch me.

Enjoy your second grade pussy, second grade job, second grade lifestyle, you Marxist degenerate. There won't be any socialist revolution in your lifetime, socialism is near enough dead.
Dude, your rage is hilarious! It's like watching a two-year-old stamp his feet! :lol:

[Sinister Intents]

I'll concede the first point, but the claim he was in any way making an apologia for rape is entirely unfounded.

I'm sure he'll make rape apologia eventually, and I'm also sure he'll expose other pathetic, weak minded beliefs.

[Marshal of the People]

I'm sure he'll make rape apologia eventually, and I'm also sure he'll expose other pathetic, weak minded beliefs.

Such is the disease known as conservatism.

[Sinister Intents]

...

He objectifies women obviously and probably also finds rape as something almost non existant and/or something that doesn't matter because he percieves women as less than himself instead of equals.

[Sinister Intents]

"Probably"

Not to blow this thread out of proportion, but what we're dealing with is effectively a show trial.

Show trial? In my experiences men who espouse this bullshit often are rape apologists, but not always.

[IBleedRed]

Why do you guys keep feeding the troll? He has a Tony Blair avatar, for Marx's sake!

[Sinister Intents]

Why do you guys keep feeding the troll? He has a Tony Blair avatar, for Marx's sake!

Because I want him to fuck up and expose himself for who he is, and I love that you said "for Marx's sake!" I'm gonna have to adopt saying that in real life despite being an anarchist, but Marxism applies to anarchism IMO.

[Marshal of the People]

Why do you guys keep feeding the troll? He has a Tony Blair avatar, for Marx's sake!

I love your joke "for Marx's sake!", do you mind if I use it?

[IBleedRed]

I love your joke "for Marx's sake!", do you mind if I use it?
Not at all but you need to pay me a royalty every time you say it. This is capitalism, after all.

Kidding.

SI: He's clearly a cappie, what do you mean "expose" him? Oh well, if you're having fun, I can't stop you.

[Marshal of the People]

Because I want him to fuck up and expose himself for who he is, and I love that you said "for Marx's sake!" I'm gonna have to adopt saying that in real life despite being an anarchist, but Marxism applies to anarchism IMO.

Yes I do want him to expose himself as well, it is also good practice for debating conservative and such not. Plus when we refute him we may be swaying guests to our views but if we ignore him a guest could take that we don't have a proper argument to refute him with.

[Sinister Intents]

Not at all but you need to pay me a royalty every time you say it. This is capitalism, after all.

Kidding.

SI: He's clearly a cappie, what do you mean "expose" him? Oh well, if you're having fun, I can't stop you.

Indeed I be having fun, and how about I send you a picture of 5 Russian rubles everytime I use it?


It is ironically this same logic which sexists invoke to dismiss without due process any rape allegations they deem false: "In my experience these sorts of women probably just regret the bad sex."

The witch-hunt continues!

I see your point comrade, I'll keep this in mind for future reference.

[IBleedRed]

Indeed I be having fun, and how about I send you a picture of 5 Russian rubles everytime I use it?

I only accept payments in jelly beans
http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/102774/8245267.html

[Sabot Cat]

Um, if Schumpeter really wants to know: your hot dog van isn't really a revolutionary priority. Maybe after the proletariat seizes nearly complete control of the means of production, you can participate in the underground hot dog black market, and then when we can get around to you when we start to care.

[Marshal of the People]

Um, if Schumpeter really wants to know: your hot dog van isn't really a revolutionary priority. Maybe after the proletariat seizes control of the means of production, you can participate in the underground hot dog black market, and when we can get around to you when we start to care.

Just because we particularly don't like Schumpeter we shall seize his vans immediately

[Sabot Cat]

Just because we particular don't like Schumpeter we shall seize his vans immediately

Excellent point, comrade. It's an important reactionary symbol that shouldn't be seized, but demolished for the benefits of energizing the collective spirit of revolution. The van shall be toppled, and the hot dogs liberated from therein to a cheering crowd.

[Marshal of the People]

Excellent point, comrade. It's an important reactionary symbol that should be demolished for the benefits of energizing the collective spirit of revolution. The van shall be toppled, and the hot dogs liberated from therein to a cheering crowd.

The workers shall receive free hot dogs for carrying out a revolution is hard and on an empty stomach even harder!

[adipocere]

I'm a student but I run a small business on the side with my friend, we own two vans which we converted to sell fast food (e.g burgers, hot dogs or fish and chips), these we(well I) use to market our goods at events (paying the organizers commission), usually we will run one, we split the profit however we recently purchased another and we have a Romanian immigrant working for us in the other van, he gets paid below the 'living wage' (though he only works a few hours on sat or sun, he has a job Mon-Friday).

Would you object to this and what/why specifically please. Perhaps you can convince me to change my operations.

Under the circumstances, your operation does not sound particularly problematic. However, I do think that if you are profiting, than you can afford to pay your employee a decent wage - especially if you depend on his work for profit. The value of his labor is not just in flipping burgers, you trust the guy with your money and van, right? If he thinks you are a useless dick, he might seize the means of production himself and that would be really embarrassing to confess to in Econ 101, wouldn't it?

[Brandon's Impotent Rage]

The workers shall receive free hot dogs for carrying out a revolution is hard and on an empty stomach even harder!

And yea, there will be much chili and mustard to put upon the hotdogs, and the local farmer's market will be raided (in case anyone wants to do the whole Chicago thing).

[Marshal of the People]

And yea, there will be much chili and mustard to put upon the hotdogs, and the local farmer's market will be raided (in case anyone wants to do the whole Chicago thing).

Farmers Markets are capitalist and shall be shut down by force if necessary!

[Brandon's Impotent Rage]

Oh, and anyone who adds ketchup to a hotdog is a reactionary and must be liquidated.

[Marshal of the People]

Oh, and anyone who adds ketchup to a hotdog is a reactionary and must be liquidated.

Also you must eat your hotdog while break dancing and singing the Internationale or else you will also be labeled a reactionary.

[Sea]

Would you object to this and what/why specifically please. Perhaps you can convince me to change my operations.How many workers do you hire, and how much do you profit by the exploitation of their labor? So far, I don't think there is anything especially objectionable about what you do. edit: didn't see the part about the Romanian... How much is "below a living wage"?

Whats so wrong with it? Would you prefer me to sell my vans sit at home and suck my dick?You can do that? I can only barely fit my tip in, and not even that if I have a large meal. I'd be lying if I said I wasn't jealous. Anywho, go re-read what The Unknown Zero said about private propetry, and go think about how that relates to selling things.
I'm asking why, comprehension not your strong point?If you bothered to read up on Marx (which, no matter what your politics are, would be a wise thing to do before debating a bunch of Marxists) you wouldn't have to ask such questions. You can ask us why the sky is blue, but that doesn't mean many of us will bother answering, even if we know already.

[Marshal of the People]

You can do that? I can only barely fit my tip in, and not even that if I have a large meal. I'd be lying if I said I wasn't jealous.

I shouldn't find that funny but it cracked me up so much I almost fell off my chair.

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

and the local farmer's market will be raided (in case anyone wants to do the whole Chicago thing).
That would be me! Though a slaw dog would be nice, too. :grin:

[Marshal of the People]

That would be me! Though a slaw dog would be nice, too. :grin:

What is a "slaw dog"?

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

What is a "slaw dog"?
Cole slaw on a hot dog. It can be just cole slaw or a mixture of chili and cole slaw.

[Regicollis]

The hot dog vans will become property of the people and probably be amalgamated into a cooperative with other fast food vans. The workers of this cooperative (including you and your underpaid Romanian) would then run the hot dog vans according to democratic principles.

Sendt fra min HUAWEI Y300-0100 med Tapatalk

[Comrade Jacob]

No, your van with be stripped of it's food to feed the revolution and the van itself with be made into an armored-tank.
But in all seriousness your business won't exist as a private business.

[Ceallach_the_Witch]

At the moment, feel free to operate how you want. We're not here to tell business owners what to do, after all. The only thing that seems particularly worthy of criticism is the employ of someone at minimum wage - on the other hand that's the "going rate" for jobs like working at a food van. I suspect from what you say that your van is probably a second or third part-time job for your employee.

re: what will happen to my sausage van?

I'm not a prophet so I don't know. It might look like what some people have said in the thread, it might differ radically. I suspect at the end of the day, if you are good at driving vans and making hot-dogs and you enjoy it, you will continue to be in demand as someone good at that. If not, you might as well do something you actually enjoy/excel at.

[motion denied]

We'll take the lot.

[#FF0000]

I'll be laughing all the way to the bank, your socialist revolution is never going to catch me.

Enjoy your second grade pussy, second grade job, second grade lifestyle, you Marxist degenerate. There won't be any socialist revolution in your lifetime, socialism is near enough dead.

i never thought you could hear a voice crack over the internet

[Criminalize Heterosexuality]

I'll concede the first point, but the claim he was in any way making an apologia for rape is entirely unfounded.

Well, he is more than comfortable exploiting (in his fantasies or in reality) the structural economic and cultural problems women face in order to "get pussy" - that might not be rape apologia s. s., but it is rape-y (a term I am indebted to TGDU for) as hell. I mean, come on, that was sub-fedora-wearer rhetoric.


It is ironically this same logic which sexists invoke to dismiss without due process any rape allegations they deem false: "In my experience these sorts of women probably just regret the bad sex."

But this is a purely formal comparison, abstracted from the material conditions. Schumpfie will not be subjected to structural violence by the bourgeois state due to anything written in this thread, for one thing.


Um, if Schumpeter really wants to know: your hot dog van isn't really a revolutionary priority. Maybe after the proletariat seizes nearly complete control of the means of production, you can participate in the underground hot dog black market, and then when we can get around to you when we start to care.

I really don't understand why the expropriation of the means of production should be staggered in this way. I'm afraid that many people promote such "socialism on an installment plan" schemes in order to ease the petite bourgeoisie, with no strategic or tactical reason. I imagine that in the case of a socialist revolution, barring very exceptional circumstances (on the order of, say, van merchants composing over 80% of the population), his van would be carrying food to impoverished areas by the end of the first week.


You can do that? I can only barely fit my tip in, and not even that if I have a large meal. I'd be lying if I said I wasn't jealous.

Suffering Stalin, what do you people do to your spines? I'd need a tongue twice as long as my current one to even touch the tip.

[Marshal of the People]

We'll take the lot.

Comrade Jacques we shall also confiscate all his personal property and give it to the Romanian man who he so cruelly exploits and uses as a wage slave.

[Schumpeter]

Comrade Jacques we shall also confiscate all his personal property and give it to the Romanian man who he so cruelly exploits and uses as a wage slave.

Wage slavery doesn't exist in Britain.

[Sinister Intents]

Wage slavery doesn't exist in Britain.

Yes it does. Wage slavery exists everywhere under capitalism! I'm a wage slave to my father! You sell your labor to a capitalist for a wage, that makes you a wage slave.

[Schumpeter]

Yes it does. Wage slavery exists everywhere under capitalism! I'm a wage slave to my father! You sell your labor to a capitalist for a wage, that makes you a wage slave.

No, you could choose to live on JSA instead. There is a choice.

[Sinister Intents]

No, you could choose to live on JSA instead. There is a choice.

No not really. What about your sexist shit from earlier

[Schumpeter]

No not really. What about your sexist shit from earlier

It wasn't sexist, if what I said is sexist then prostitution is sexist.

[Sinister Intents]

It wasn't sexist, if what I said is sexist then prostitution is sexist.

Do you even know why prostitution exists? Prostitution can be very sexist, the women are selling their bodies for a profit and often someone makes profit off of their labor.

[IBleedRed]

It wasn't sexist, if what I said is sexist then prostitution is sexist.

Prostitution is literally the selling of the body for money in order to make a living, and it disproportionately preys on women (i.e. the group of people who have been disenfranchised, oppressed, and kept dependent under the system called patriarchy). What isn't sexist about that?

[Schumpeter]

Prostitution is literally the selling of the body for money in order to make a living, and it disproportionately preys on women (i.e. the group of people who have been disenfranchised, oppressed, and kept dependent under the system called patriarchy). What isn't sexist about that?

What is sexist about it? Women and men are both afforded equal liberty and there is no 'preying' as you put it as it is based on free exchange.

[Sinister Intents]

Read this: http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/goldman/works/1910/traffic-women.htm

[Schumpeter]

Read this: http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/goldman/works/1910/traffic-women.htm

That is illegal, whats your point? Making it illegal won't stop activity which is already happening illegally.

[Sinister Intents]

What is sexist about it? Women and men are both afforded equal liberty and there is no 'preying' as you put it as it is based on free exchange.

I think you're a fucking idiot. It's predominantly women selling their bodies literally for a fucking amount of money. That is not fucking free exchange, women are forced into these kinds of thing because of the patriarchal capitalist society we live in.

[Schumpeter]

I think you're a fucking idiot. It's predominantly women selling their bodies literally for a fucking amount of money. That is not fucking free exchange, women are forced into these kinds of thing because of the patriarchal capitalist society we live in.

I'm not advocating laissez faire, but such an industry working within an economy with a welfare state would be perfectly acceptable for the reasons outlined above.

[Sinister Intents]

That is illegal, whats your point? Making it illegal won't stop activity which is already happening illegally.

The market for it exists heavily because its illegal, I'm not advocating illegalization daftie. Did you even fucking read it??

[Queen Mab]

No, you could choose to live on JSA instead. There is a choice.

Yeah, no. Have you ever tried?

[Schumpeter]

Yeah, no. Have you ever tried?

I have three uncles living on benefits if you must know. Whether or not I've tried is irrelevant, please address the arguments not the person making them.

[#FF0000]

i dunno why people bother engaging w/ lil babies who aren't here for discussion anyway but to throw words at things be self-satisfied.

[Schumpeter]

i dunno why people bother engaging w/ lil babies who aren't here for discussion anyway but to throw words at things be self-satisfied.

You're not here for discussion, in-fact you are actively discouraging it, hypocrite.

[Queen Mab]

I have three uncles living on benefits if you must know.

Not JSA, though.

[Sinister Intents]

I'm not advocating laissez faire, but such an industry working within an economy with a welfare state would be perfectly acceptable for the reasons outlined above.

I think you're an idiot.


I have three uncles living on benefits if you must know. Whether or not I've tried is irrelevant, please address the arguments not the person making them.

You're not even arguing against what I've said. This has nothing to fucking do with the text I posted.


i dunno why people bother engaging w/ lil babies who aren't here for discussion anyway but to throw words at things be self-satisfied.

Good point!

[IBleedRed]

What is sexist about it? Women and men are both afforded equal liberty and there is no 'preying' as you put it as it is based on free exchange.
Right, because women choose to be prostitutes and get abused and possibly seriously injured or even murdered by clients who literally treat them like objects

[#FF0000]

You're not here for discussion, in-fact you are actively discouraging it, hypocrite.

Nah I'm actively discouraging people from trying to engage with you because it would be a waste of time.

[#FF0000]

Also this probably isn't the best thread to have a discussion on an issue as complicated as sex work, tbh.

[Sinister Intents]

Would you give women a dollar amount like god did in the bible Schumpeter?
Would you be a pimp and sell some women as a commodity and abuse her?

[#FF0000]

"hey stop talking to this rock"
"good idea. i still have a question i want addressed though"

[Lily Briscoe]

God this is a shit thread.

[Sinister Intents]

"hey stop talking to this rock"
"good idea. i still have a question i want addressed though"

Yeah I'll just quit, its only pissing me off.

[Ceallach_the_Witch]

I have three uncles living on benefits if you must know. Whether or not I've tried is irrelevant, please address the arguments not the person making them.

I have five close friends (possibly more, people can be cagey about it given that the press demonise people on benefits/income support) who depend on benefits - two recieve income support for jobs that don't pay anywhere near the living wage (in the city with one of the cheapest costs of living in the UK) and three are completely dependent on benefits to survive - I know because two of them live with me and they have trouble paying the bills and rent (rent being £30 a week each and bills being ~£10 over winter a week each) You get the dole every two weeks - JSA being £56.50 a week (minimum) and housing benefit (covering the rent) At that kind of income level, you are quite literally eating most of your income - and that's before you get to bills for mobile phones (and let's be honest, those are more or less required to secure the casual work a lot of people have to settle for.) It is not a particularly pleasant existence - my friends are relatively lucky because living in what is still classified as a student house exempts them from a few extra costs - but after fairly basic needs are met there is precious little left over.

Let's also not forget the psychological impact. Not only are you isolated due to the lack of opportunities for socialising at work and outside work, you are also stigmatised simply for being on the dole. Daily you are reminded on televisions, radios and newspapers that you are worthless, a drain on other people, a lazy sponger who by all rights is little better than a criminal. Does that sound like a life you'd take if you had any alternative at all? Even working at a takeaway - at least you can say to people that you have a job. Being jobless - being dependent in a society where your worth as an adult human being is determined by your material wealth - is incredibly demoralising and depressing. Long-term unemployment corrodes your self worth, poisons your mind until you begin to believe what is said about you. A job would have to be spectacularly poorly paid and unpleasant to actively choose benefits over employment. Hell, there are quite a few people out there working soul-destroying jobs for very little more than they'd get on benefits (i.e telemarketing or working in nightclubs) because as shit as a job is, nobody can call you a doley.

[Thirsty Crow]

Right, because women choose to be prostitutes and get abused and possibly seriously injured or even murdered by clients who literally treat them like objects
The whole point of the argument is to frame freedom of choice as manifest when there isn't any institutionally codified practice of discrimination or an personal relationship, or better yet a relationship of personal direct dependency through force, which is at the same time political (as with surpassed feudal relations) or not (as with cases of de facto slavery in capitalism - again involving force).

It really is that simple, and the argument exhausts itself in claiming that people necessarily and always choose on their own when they aren't violently forced into specific actions (or via the threat of legitimate violence). This is basic liberalism in the form of recognizing political equality, the equality before the law (which is historically only possible when individuals become commodity owners engaged in exchange), as ensuring social harmony, prosperity and progress.

The way to deal with that shit is definitely not to make snide comments. This comment is completely vapid in this framework since it is obvious that women make those choices - it's not their children or perhaps their TVs that make choices, but maybe it would be best to try and clarify your own criticism and positions through actually engaging the argument at hand.

No need for either continued snippy posts or for an elaborate argument meant to "convert" this lil troll.

[Comrade #138672]

Why is Schumpeter still here? He is clearly a troll. He is not here to discuss anything sincerely. He is only here to piss people off.

Do not get so worked up because of him. This is exactly what he wants. Sometimes you need to calm down first and think: what is the other person trying to achieve? Then act, or not.

[GiantMonkeyMan]

I have five close friends (possibly more, people can be cagey about it given that the press demonise people on benefits/income support) who depend on benefits - two recieve income support for jobs that don't pay anywhere near the living wage (in the city with one of the cheapest costs of living in the UK) and three are completely dependent on benefits to survive - I know because two of them live with me and they have trouble paying the bills and rent (rent being £30 a week each and bills being ~£10 over winter a week each) You get the dole every two weeks - JSA being £56.50 a week (minimum) and housing benefit (covering the rent) At that kind of income level, you are quite literally eating most of your income - and that's before you get to bills for mobile phones (and let's be honest, those are more or less required to secure the casual work a lot of people have to settle for.) It is not a particularly pleasant existence - my friends are relatively lucky because living in what is still classified as a student house exempts them from a few extra costs - but after fairly basic needs are met there is precious little left over.

Let's also not forget the psychological impact. Not only are you isolated due to the lack of opportunities for socialising at work and outside work, you are also stigmatised simply for being on the dole. Daily you are reminded on televisions, radios and newspapers that you are worthless, a drain on other people, a lazy sponger who by all rights is little better than a criminal. Does that sound like a life you'd take if you had any alternative at all? Even working at a takeaway - at least you can say to people that you have a job. Being jobless - being dependent in a society where your worth as an adult human being is determined by your material wealth - is incredibly demoralising and depressing. Long-term unemployment corrodes your self worth, poisons your mind until you begin to believe what is said about you. A job would have to be spectacularly poorly paid and unpleasant to actively choose benefits over employment. Hell, there are quite a few people out there working soul-destroying jobs for very little more than they'd get on benefits (i.e telemarketing or working in nightclubs) because as shit as a job is, nobody can call you a doley.
Good post, being on the dole is fucking difficult. Also, you generally are doing work. Every time you have to fill in one of those pointless forms for the fiftieth time that interrogate you about your personal life, every stupid online job application you have to fill out knowing full well the lack of any chance of actually getting the job, all those pointless courses you're forced to go on where people as bored as you tell you that you have to act happy in interviews and 'if only you tweeked your CV like this then you would get a job'; it's unpaid labour of the most pointless and demoralising kind.

[Comrade #138672]

Sinister Intents, the same question for you. Do you respond this fiercely to any sexism or homophobia in your daily life?Probably not, because this is not easy to do. So people are more likely to complain about it on the internet. So what?


Because that exists in abundance and I can't imagine you flipping your shit like that multiple times on a daily basis.So because it exists in abundance, people should be OK with it, just because you cannot imagine people being offended by these things on a daily basis?


It just feels insincere and forced.Why? Because you do not want to take it seriously anyway?


Challenging everyday, casual sexism and homophobia is fine, but there's no need to be hysterical about it.Are you sure you want to use "hysterical" in this context?


Expressing concern about sexism is not the issue now is it? I just can't see you two turning red faced ( :cursing: ) and screaming at someone in a cafeteria when he says "I got so much pussy last night bro". Everyday sexism is so... everyday and casual that flipping your shit at it each time not something I see anyone do. Why can't you just say, "reducing women to their genitalia is inappropriate and dehumanising". It gets the point across more effectively.Well, this guy is obviously a reactionary / troll, so I do not see why anyone should be nice to him. He obviously does not listen anyway.


Yeah I don't buy that.I do. You're confusing courage with sincerity.


I don't buy that either. Unless you're telling me that you scream at people in public on a daily basis and alienated all your (non-political) friends, which I find highly unlikely.Yes, because everyone is like that troll IRL.

[Lily Briscoe]

^Personally I completely agree with 'Tim Cornelis' that it seems insincere and fake. To me, it comes across as being completely about trying to look like some righteous feminist superman by flailing around and posturing rather than being an honest attempt to actually challenge problematic ideas or a genuine expression of disgust (and really, of all the horrible shit in our daily lives to feel disgusted over, some probable troll on a message board bragging about how he gets "good pussy" [and has to pay for it lol...you'd think it would make him feel inadequate rather than proud...] seems pretty small fry to say the least...).

[Sabot Cat]

^Personally I completely agree with 'Tim Cornelis' that it seems insincere and fake. To me, it comes across as being completely about trying to look like some righteous feminist superman by flailing around and posturing rather than being an honest attempt to actually challenge problematic ideas or a genuine expression of disgust (and really, of all the horrible shit in our daily lives to feel disgusted over, some probable troll on a message board bragging about how he gets "good pussy" [and has to pay for it lol...you'd think it would make him feel inadequate rather than proud...] seems pretty small fry to say the least...).

This is a long way of making an appeal to relative privation, a logical fallacy. One could argue that there's always something more important ad infinitum. Is it not even more small fry to critique Sinister Intent's emotional tenor in his opposition to sexism, instead of you know, sexism?

[Lily Briscoe]

This is a long way of making an appeal to relative privation, a logical fallacy. this is like a really technical way of saying you're missing the point (surprisingly, my main point was actually the bit outside the parentheses)

One could argue that there's always something more important ad infinitum. Is it not even more small fry to critique Sinister Intent's emotional tenor in his opposition to sexism, instead of you know, sexism?
My point wasn't that people in this thread should stop challenging less important forms of sexism when there are more important forms of sexism to challenge, it was that I don't think they're challenging sexism at all. And maybe I'm just a horribly cynical person, but I'm frankly really unconvinced that 'challenging sexism' is even the intention.

[Marxaveli]

Wow, I can't believe this piece of shit thread went 8 fucking pages. OP is obviously a complete troll, attention-seeking dipshit. Surprised he hasn't been banned yet.

[Schumpeter]

I have five close friends (possibly more, people can be cagey about it given that the press demonise people on benefits/income support) who depend on benefits - two recieve income support for jobs that don't pay anywhere near the living wage (in the city with one of the cheapest costs of living in the UK) and three are completely dependent on benefits to survive - I know because two of them live with me and they have trouble paying the bills and rent (rent being £30 a week each and bills being ~£10 over winter a week each) You get the dole every two weeks - JSA being £56.50 a week (minimum) and housing benefit (covering the rent) At that kind of income level, you are quite literally eating most of your income - and that's before you get to bills for mobile phones (and let's be honest, those are more or less required to secure the casual work a lot of people have to settle for.) It is not a particularly pleasant existence - my friends are relatively lucky because living in what is still classified as a student house exempts them from a few extra costs - but after fairly basic needs are met there is precious little left over.

Let's also not forget the psychological impact. Not only are you isolated due to the lack of opportunities for socialising at work and outside work, you are also stigmatised simply for being on the dole. Daily you are reminded on televisions, radios and newspapers that you are worthless, a drain on other people, a lazy sponger who by all rights is little better than a criminal. Does that sound like a life you'd take if you had any alternative at all? Even working at a takeaway - at least you can say to people that you have a job. Being jobless - being dependent in a society where your worth as an adult human being is determined by your material wealth - is incredibly demoralising and depressing. Long-term unemployment corrodes your self worth, poisons your mind until you begin to believe what is said about you. A job would have to be spectacularly poorly paid and unpleasant to actively choose benefits over employment. Hell, there are quite a few people out there working soul-destroying jobs for very little more than they'd get on benefits (i.e telemarketing or working in nightclubs) because as shit as a job is, nobody can call you a doley.

Look I completely sympathize with those living on the dole, I am in no ways a 'benefits basher' but you have conceded that there is a choice, thus it is fallacious to make claims of 'wage slavery' when we have a safety net in place. As touching as your little out pour is, it follows no flow of logic in relation the discussion and is you have essentially missed the point.

[Schumpeter]

Wow, I can't believe this piece of shit thread went 8 fucking pages. OP is obviously a complete troll, attention-seeking dipshit. Surprised he hasn't been banned yet.

Don't post in OI if you can't tolerate plurality of opinion.

[Sinister Intents]

Look I completely sympathize with those living on the dole, I am in no ways a 'benefits basher' but you have conceded that there is a choice, thus it is fallacious to make claims of 'wage slavery' when we have a safety net in place. As touching as your little out pour is, it follows no flow of logic in relation the discussion and is you have essentially missed the point.

I think you missed the point of what Rousing Chorus and so many others have said troll.

[IBleedRed]

Look I completely sympathize with those living on the dole, I am in no ways a 'benefits basher' but you have conceded that there is a choice, thus it is fallacious to make claims of 'wage slavery' when we have a safety net in place. As touching as your little out pour is, it follows no flow of logic in relation the discussion and is you have essentially missed the point.

How does a worker have a choice when he owns no means of production in order to produce for himself?

All the land is already taken. All the factories are already privately owned. What's the worker to do? He can't support himself except by working for a wage. This condition is fundamental to capitalism.

BTW I'm still waiting for your response in the "schools of economic thought" thread.

[Schumpeter]

I think you missed the point of what Rousing Chorus and so many others have said troll.

I get rousing's point, however her point is irrelevant in the context of the discussion.

Why?

Well because:

A Stated that wage slavery exists in the UK

B objected, citing the existence of the welfare state as a safety net, thus providing a choice thus proving the claim of wage slavery to be fallacious.

C (rousing) Made a point about how it is hard to live on benefits and that not many people would want to make the choice, however C concedes that there is a choice thus C has not been able to rebut B's claims of A stating a logical fallacy.

[Marxaveli]

Don't post in OI if you can't tolerate plurality of opinion.

I just find it insane that good revolutionaries in the past have been banned or restricted, yet you, a complete and unapologetic racist and sexist reactionary, are still allowed to post at all. You are scum, and there is no tolerance for your "opinions". Fuck your opinions - its your opinions and the like why the world is such a shitty fucking place to live in. And the world will be a much more pleasant place to live when you and the rest of your parasitic capitalist ilk are swept into the dustbin of history.

I don't post in here to "tolerate" your opinions, I post in here to shit on the likes of you.

[Schumpeter]

How does a worker have a choice when he owns no means of production in order to produce for himself?

All the land is already taken. All the factories are already privately owned. What's the worker to do? He can't support himself except by working for a wage. This condition is fundamental to capitalism.

BTW I'm still waiting for your response in the "schools of economic thought" thread.

I'm assuming you don't live in the UK. In the UK if you are unemployed the government will give you money with which to survive with if you are laid off and looking for work or if you are unable to work for whatever reason e.g disability.

Also land/capital are not fixed, they technically never are in reality.

OK I'll take a look, I had to deal with those calling for my head branding me a 'troll' firstly.

[Sinister Intents]

BTW I'm still waiting for your response in the "schools of economic thought" thread.

He's ignored my questions and points, I think he's scares

[Schumpeter]

I just find it insane that good revolutionaries in the past have been banned or restricted, yet you, a complete and unapologetic racist and sexist reactionary, are still allowed to post at all. You are scum, and there is no tolerance for your "opinions". Fuck your opinions - its your opinions and the like why the world is such a shitty fucking place to live in. And the world will be a much more pleasant place to live when you and the rest of your parasitic capitalist ilk are swept into the dustbin of history.

Racist? Sexist? Evidence please or your merely debasing the words into common slurs.

I wonder how you would of felt living under that same logic in the McCarthy era.

[IBleedRed]

I'm assuming you don't live in the UK. In the UK if you are unemployed the government will give you money with which to survive with if you are laid off and looking for work or if you are unable to work for whatever reason e.g disability. That doesn't give you a "choice". Unemployment benefits are not a viable way of earning a living permanently for anybody and everybody. They are temporary measures designed to help workers get back on their feet as they look for more work.

The fundamental imperative to work for a capitalist is still there. Few workers have any real choice in this matter. You also need to remember that unemployment benefits wouldn't even be there if labor had not agitated for them. Capitalists don't want to provide welfare if they can get away with not doing so.



Also land/capital are not fixed, they technically never are in reality.


What does that mean?

Since you live in the UK you may want to read this:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1328270/A-Britain-STILL-belongs-aristocracy.html


A group of 36,000 individuals – only 0.6 per cent of the population – own 50 per cent of rural land.

Their assets account for 20million out of Britain’s 60million acres of land, and the researchers estimate that the vast majority is actually owned by a wealthy core of just 1,200 aristocrats and their relatives.


The top ten individual biggest owners control a staggering total of more than a million acres between them.



Seriously? You don't see the problem with this?

[Marxaveli]

Capitalists are funny - they don't even understand how their own system objectively works. :laugh:

[Schumpeter]

That doesn't give you a "choice". Unemployment benefits are not a viable way of earning a living permanently for anybody and everybody. They are temporary measures designed to help workers get back on their feet as they look for more work.

The fundamental imperative to work for a capitalist is still there. Few workers have any real choice in this matter. You also need to remember that unemployment benefits wouldn't even be there if labor had not agitated for them. Capitalists don't want to provide welfare if they can get away with not doing so.




What does that mean?

Since you live in the UK you may want to read this:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1328270/A-Britain-STILL-belongs-aristocracy.html



Seriously? You don't see the problem with this?
[/COLOR][/LEFT]

Unemployment benefits can be lived on, the government does not allow its citizens to starve, of course only a very very small minority actually choose to do so (its disgusting how the political right has made such a mountain out of this molehill), but the claim of wage slavery is clearly fallacious as there is this governmental support.


Labour the party? Or is this more Marxist hyperbole? Many of the middle class support my party, new labour, those whom you would regard as petty bourgeois. Empathy and compassion to exist.

I wouldn't be opposed to a land tax, but what else would you propose?

[Sinister Intents]

Unemployment benefits can be lived on, the government does not allow its citizens to starve, of course only a very very small minority actually choose to do so (its disgusting how the political right has made such a mountain out of this molehill), but the claim of wage slavery is clearly fallacious as there is this governmental support.

Some can live on unemployment benefits for a very short time, its always temporary. I've seen that often the government doesn't care about its citizens, governments and states care about maintaining class rule and compliance of the citizens suffering under its weight. Wage slavery still exists as well because the working class sells their labor to capitalists for a shitty wage that they often cannot stay afloat on so the workers often get multiple jobs. The capitalists care about profit and it is expensive to pay employees higher wages so they give the lowest wage possible, and in turn the worker needs to get another job. I'm a business owner and I have to work another job because the competition in my area is brutal.


Labour the party? Or is this more Marxist hyperbole? Many of the middle class support my party, new labour, those whom you would regard as petty bourgeois. Empathy and compassion to exist.

Marxist hyberbole? Whats your party? I've met no compassion or empathy from the capitalists.


I wouldn't be opposed to a land tax, but what else would you propose?

Why not eliminate taxation period. All taxation is theft, and theft is bullshit, also lets eliminate the idea of property and property relations because within that is where theft originates.

[Diirez]

How would you determine his labour value, what would you say selling/cooking burgers should pay for an hours work?
One of the most disgusting and inhumane ideas is the idea that some people deserve less and contribute less to soceity. That burger seller and cooker is giving people sustinance to survive and I'm sure he's making a good burger to make people happy.

Why is it that he deserves less than the living wage because he gives people food to keep their mind and bodies working?

[Sinister Intents]

One of the most disgusting and inhumane ideas is the idea that some people deserve less and contribute less to soceity. That burger seller and cooker is giving people sustinance to survive and I'm sure he's making a good burger to make people happy.

Why is it that he deserves less than the living wage because he gives people food to keep their mind and bodies working?

Because that's not how evil reactionary logic works comrade, he probably also advocated janitors and such workers get payed next to nothing and Donald Trump hailed as a god, perhaps he sieg heils and carved the likeness of hitler in his chest. Damn capitalists

[Sabot Cat]

this is like a really technical way of saying you're missing the point (surprisingly, my main point was actually the bit outside the parentheses)

My point wasn't that people in this thread should stop challenging less important forms of sexism when there are more important forms of sexism to challenge, it was that I don't think they're challenging sexism at all. And maybe I'm just a horribly cynical person, but I'm frankly really unconvinced that 'challenging sexism' is even the intention.

Why don't you think he's not challenging sexism at all, if your perception of the issue isn't reliant upon his actions being less important than other possible ways to oppose sexism? Wouldn't all opposition to misogyny fall into that category if your fallacious appeal was truly superfluous? Unless you're trying to assess the sincerity of Sinister Intents more informally without being able to see his face or hear his voice.

[Ceallach_the_Witch]

I get rousing's point, however her point is irrelevant in the context of the discussion.



i'm a little too busy to add anything of substance here at the mo but I do have to wonder why you assumed I was a woman?

[Sinister Intents]

^Personally I completely agree with 'Tim Cornelis' that it seems insincere and fake. To me, it comes across as being completely about trying to look like some righteous feminist superman by flailing around and posturing rather than being an honest attempt to actually challenge problematic ideas or a genuine expression of disgust (and really, of all the horrible shit in our daily lives to feel disgusted over, some probable troll on a message board bragging about how he gets "good pussy" [and has to pay for it lol...you'd think it would make him feel inadequate rather than proud...] seems pretty small fry to say the least...).

How dare you assume I'm being insincer and fake. I'm not trying to look like your rather blatant assumption. I'm thoroughly against sexist bullshit, and you have no fucking clue what I deal with on a daily basis when it comes to hearing sexism or witnessing sexism. I'm taking a fucking stand against my father's sexism at home and its creating a rather hostile home environment because I'm fucking sick of it. Also at college I have just gotten in trouble recently for being belligerent with another student for being extremely sexist. I do call people out on sexist garbage, I tell them how its wrong, why, et cetera. You don't fucking know me, you don't know what I've been through in life, you don't know a fucking thing about me besides the shit that I post on this forum. Do you know what I've fucking dealt with at work when it comes to sexist employees cat calling women and hitting on passerby women? Do you know the fucking conversations I've had to deal with because of sexist employees? Did you know one of the employees I fired was a self proclaimed white fucking nationalist who believes women to be nothing more than a sex commodity to be traded, bought, sold, fucked, destroyed? Don't fucking question my life when you don't know a fucking thing about me.

[Lily Briscoe]

Do you know what I've fucking dealt with at work when it comes to sexist employees cat calling women and hitting on passerby women? Do you know the fucking conversations I've had to deal with because of sexist employees? Did you know one of the employees I fired was a
I don't even know what to say to this, honestly.

[Sam_b]

How is counter-trolling the troll to 'expose him' going to do anything? Good luck 'exposing' a random guy on an internet forum who you do not know and will likely never meet, solid strategy.

[Sinister Intents]

I don't even know what to say to this, honestly.

You don't need to say anything comrade, just stating that I thoroughly do care. All sexist bullshit matters and none of it should be ignored

[Schumpeter]

i'm a little too busy to add anything of substance here at the mo but I do have to wonder why you assumed I was a woman?

Yeah sorry about that, you just have a female avatar so I instinctively went with she.

[Schumpeter]

How is counter-trolling the troll to 'expose him' going to do anything? Good luck 'exposing' a random guy on an internet forum who you do not know and will likely never meet, solid strategy.

I'm not a troll

[Sinister Intents]

Yeah sorry about that, you just have a female avatar so I instinctively went with she.

When you make assumptions you make an ass of yourself.


I'm not a troll

You're definitely a capitalist if not, you should reply to some of my posts

[Schumpeter]

One of the most disgusting and inhumane ideas is the idea that some people deserve less and contribute less to soceity. That burger seller and cooker is giving people sustinance to survive and I'm sure he's making a good burger to make people happy.

Why is it that he deserves less than the living wage because he gives people food to keep their mind and bodies working?


The ethical basis upon which this system of resource allocation via wages is based upon is utilitarianism. The concept of 'marginal utility' can be employed to show that the cost to society of the removal of the cooker is smaller than the cost to society of the removal of say a doctor. Why?

Well because it is harder to become a doctor than it is to become a cooker of burgers as doctors have to go through years of rigorous training before they are able to practise their profession, however the burger cooker/seller whilst they may have of worked hard to get to where they are, the profession require skills that are more easily attainable than the skills required to become a doctor.

So where am I going with this?

Essentially I am saying that the marginal utility(to society) of the doctor is greater than the marginal utility of the burger seller as if you were to remove the burger seller and the doctor society would bare a greater cost replacing the doctor as opposed to replacing the burger seller. Furthermore the derived utility of the consumer of the doctors products generally derive more utility from the consumption than consuming the product of the burger seller, thus the doctors profession contributes more to the greater good and thus paying the doctor more is ethical.

[Marxaveli]

Ahhh yes, marginal utility explains it all.

Too bad the theory has long been debunked by Marxists ages ago, and yet the pseudoscience bourgeois economists still run with this economic idealism. Don't believe me?

This article here is pretty convincing:

http://www.marxist.com/in-defence-of-ltv.htm

[Schumpeter]

Ahhh yes, marginal utility explains it all.

Too bad the theory has long been debunked by Marxists ages ago, and yet the pseudoscience bourgeois economists still run with this economic idealism. Don't believe me?

This article here is pretty convincing:

http://www.marxist.com/in-defence-of-ltv.htm

Well yes its that old chestnut isn't it, a central question in economics, what is value? If you disagree on what value is then we will never be able to reach a consensus on most economic matters.

[Sinister Intents]

The ethical basis upon which this system of resource allocation via wages is based upon is utilitarianism. The concept of 'marginal utility' can be employed to show that the cost to society of the removal of the cooker is smaller than the cost to society of the removal of say a doctor. Why?

Utilitarianism is bullshit and says nothing, Labour Theory of Value prevails because of the fact that people predominantly sell their labor for a shitty wage. You saying a cook should be paid less than a doctor, or a janitor paid less than a someone else is pathetic and disgusting. To each according to their ability, to each according to there need to paraphrase Marx. Let's abolish the idea of money, better yet lets abolish capitalism and establish socialism because under socialism people work by free association rather than competition and people can work voluntarily for their own enjoyment and benefit, and for others enjoyment and benefit. Fuck your capitalist bullshit, and fuck those that espouse capitalism as good and superior.


Well because it is harder to become a doctor than it is to become a cooker of burgers as doctors have to go through years of rigorous training before they are able to practise their profession, however the burger cooker/seller whilst they may have of worked hard to get to where they are, the profession require skills that are more easily attainable than the skills required to become a doctor.

Skilled an unskilled labor speaks nothing, a doctor is not superior to a cook. They deserve the same benefits and treatment and don't deserve to be treated any differently and they both provide a good benefit to society. Cooks and chefs require skill often, also capitalist enterprises like restaurants will be completely revamped under socialism. Workers will be able to work at the restaurant voluntarily, and most likely a lot of the work at restaurants will be done by machines under socialism. Doctors and hospitals under socialism will function differently as well. Their will be completely free and beneficial healthcare, and doctors will be educated on the skills required at schools, colleges, universities, et cetera to get the knowledge freely for their benefit and enjoyment.


So where am I going with this?

No where.


Essentially I am saying that the marginal utility(to society) of the doctor is greater than the marginal utility of the burger seller as if you were to remove the burger seller and the doctor society would bare a greater cost replacing the doctor as opposed to replacing the burger seller. Furthermore the derived utility of the consumer of the doctors products generally derive more utility from the consumption than consuming the product of the burger seller, thus the doctors profession contributes more to the greater good and thus paying the doctor more is ethical.

Labour theory of value again prevails over utilitarianism.

[Sinister Intents]

Well yes its that old chestnut isn't it, a central question in economics, what is value? If you disagree on what value is then we will never be able to reach a consensus on most economic matters.

Go fucking read Capital. Also go reading around this website for your damned answers because they're hidden in the archives of this forum! Just do a search!

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

Claiming unemployment benefits in the UK is in no way a realistic alternative to being employed.

It's called Jobseeker's Allowance, and your Jobseeker's Agreement will always contain the condition that one has to be looking for work. It is and always has been a stop-gap measure to support people in between jobs, not an alternative to being in paid employment.

[Schumpeter]

Claiming unemployment benefits in the UK is in no way a realistic alternative to being employed.

It's called Jobseeker's Allowance, and your Jobseeker's Agreement will always contain the condition that one has to be looking for work. It is and always has been a stop-gap measure to support people in between jobs, not an alternative to being in paid employment.

Yeah but it allows you to choose a different job

[Einkarl]

I'll be laughing all the way to the bank, your socialist revolution is never going to catch me.

Enjoy your second grade pussy, second grade job, second grade lifestyle, you Marxist degenerate. There won't be any socialist revolution in your lifetime, socialism is near enough dead.

*tips fedora*

[Revenant]

I'm a student but I run a small business on the side with my friend, we own two vans which we converted to sell fast food (e.g burgers, hot dogs or fish and chips), these we(well I) use to market our goods at events (paying the organizers commission), usually we will run one, we split the profit however we recently purchased another and we have a Romanian immigrant working for us in the other van, he gets paid below the 'living wage' (though he only works a few hours on sat or sun, he has a job Mon-Friday).

Would you object to this and what/why specifically please. Perhaps you can convince me to change my operations.

What are you working for?

Where do you get the burgers and meat products?

Do you grow the potatoes for the chips?

Do you support Saudi Arabia and Qatar in line with our government's requirement to trade with these countries for oil?

Then why not move there then you can own a real slave.

[IllumiNaughty]

Pussy as in girls, as girls like money (IN GENERAL) . Yes I like to fuck, that doesn't make me sexist.

:laugh::laugh::lol: Funniest thing ive read all week. So u gotta buy em something first? How is that something to be proud of lol!

[Queen Mab]

I'll be laughing all the way to the bank, your socialist revolution is never going to catch me.

Enjoy your second grade pussy, second grade job, second grade lifestyle, you Marxist degenerate. There won't be any socialist revolution in your lifetime, socialism is near enough dead.

Honestly, you should go into comedy. This is great. :laugh:

I don't know about other comrades, but being called a Marxist degenerate makes me feel warm and fuzzy inside.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

Yeah but it allows you to choose a different job

Not really.

Have you seen the jobs that are available? Do you realise that there are more jobseekers than vacancies (in the UK at least), creating job market conditions that allow employers to set the terms in their favour? If one changes career path, one is at an immediate disasdvantage compared to fellow candidates who have been in the field longer and have more qualifications and experience. Add to that the fact that further education is becoming increasingly expensive as well as less of an advantage in today's job market. There's also precious little funding available for training, while benefits barely cover the bills, unless they fail to do even that (JSA sanctions (http://stupidsanctions.tumblr.com/) and Bedroom Tax).

There's no real choice if one doesn't want one's labour exploited and alienated, unless you're one of those lucky few who's independently wealthy or you don't mind a life on the dole or the streets.

[Bala Perdida]

I see college as becoming more of an obstacle than an advantage. I mean you basically need some form of higher education to get a decent career. Even a simple career is gonna require time at a trade school. Non of these schools come cheap either. Seems to me like another form of economically battering the working class.

[Sinister Intents]

I see college as becoming more of an obstacle than an advantage. I mean you basically need some form of higher education to get a decent career. Even a simple career is gonna require time at a trade school. Non of these schools come cheap either. Seems to me like another form of economically battering the working class.

This is very correct, I'm going to a business college on a supposed two year free scholarship, and they did not honor it. I've been struggling to pay for college because of this, and the fact that we've had a horrible business year because of bourgeois homeowners refusing to pay us and because of destructive and reactionary employees.

[Diirez]

The ethical basis upon which this system of resource allocation via wages is based upon is utilitarianism. The concept of 'marginal utility' can be employed to show that the cost to society of the removal of the cooker is smaller than the cost to society of the removal of say a doctor. Why?

Well because it is harder to become a doctor than it is to become a cooker of burgers as doctors have to go through years of rigorous training before they are able to practise their profession, however the burger cooker/seller whilst they may have of worked hard to get to where they are, the profession require skills that are more easily attainable than the skills required to become a doctor.

So where am I going with this?

Essentially I am saying that the marginal utility(to society) of the doctor is greater than the marginal utility of the burger seller as if you were to remove the burger seller and the doctor society would bare a greater cost replacing the doctor as opposed to replacing the burger seller. Furthermore the derived utility of the consumer of the doctors products generally derive more utility from the consumption than consuming the product of the burger seller, thus the doctors profession contributes more to the greater good and thus paying the doctor more is ethical.

According to this then the most of the working class should be filthy rich while Wall Street should be on welfare.

The problem is the working class is struggling while Wall Street is making billions.

[Full Metal Bolshevik]

i'm a little too busy to add anything of substance here at the mo but I do have to wonder why you assumed I was a woman?

Cause you're dumb.






























No sexist jokes? uhh, ok. :(
Though, poor guy, assuming a person online is male is ok, but female not?

But I've seen people banned for less.


PS: Sinister Intents didn't you say you were out of this thread?

[Sinister Intents]

Cause you're dumb.

No sexist jokes? uhh, ok. :(
Though, poor guy, assuming a person online is male is ok, but female not?

But I've seen people banned for less.


PS: Sinister Intents didn't you say you were out of this thread?

Why is Rousing Chorus dumb?
What? I feel kinda confused by what you said.
I probably forgot haha, I tend to be rather forgetful at times.

[Full Metal Bolshevik]

Why is Rousing Chorus dumb?
What? I feel kinda confused by what you said.
I probably forgot haha, I tend to be rather forgetful at times.
It was a stupid joke, not even personal, since the purpose was the sexism.