Respect for the Working-Class? [Archive]

red team

8th October 2006, 02:18

How did the winners on this board, arrive at their views?

Winners of what? How is it that the rich are qualified to rule?

Is it that they are more talented, more skilled, can manage things better?

If the all of the above is true then the world wouldn't be in the shape that it is in. The fact is, being wealthy is exclusive of being wise enough to rule.

The fact that there is still massive amounts of unnecessary misery, destruction and ignorance in the world disqualifies the very idea that the rich are in fact any more competent and intelligent than the average, mindless consumer cow you find in any shopping center.

The fact that your average CEO wants dumbed-down summary reports from his subordinates because he's "too busy" to look at all the details just demonstrates the fact that the above claim that wealth does not equal intelligence is more often true than not. (Let's dumb it down so an infant can understand it. This :) means the the company is doing well. This :( means the company is doing badly.)

The fact is the price system that Capitalists advocate and that we are forced to go along with gives the power of decision making more to someone's rich son or heir than it does to people who are competent in doing their job. Just from reading a fragment of the last sentence itself "...competency in doing their job" illustrates the fact that being rich gives you the advantage of hiring workers who are needed to perform a job because you can't do it yourself. So competency among hired workers implies what? The only possible conclusion would be incompetency among those who do the hiring.

Capitalist Lawyer

8th October 2006, 19:20

there are winners on Revleft?

Excuse me...the people here who actually have a decent standard of living while they were growing up and still continue to live one.

they are the bulk of all the people on earth and hopefully will be able to have a movement in which they can create a more just society.

But I thought that's not what communism is about?

It's just a theory about history. So what's with all of this rhetoric about a "more just society"?

If you work for minimum wage, support a family and try to keep up with payments on your house and vehicle and then say "this isn't difficult", then you should get treated for delusion.

Most minimum wage earners are people without kids and are usually in their teens.

If you're only making MW, why should you even have a family to support or even have a car?

Of course it's difficult, when you dig your own 15 foot grave and pile on the earth, you're going to have a difficult time trying to escape that situation.

Uhh... we ARE the working class.

So what? I could probably be considered working-class as well.

What special privileges are YOU entitled to?

How is it that the rich are qualified to rule?

Rule what?

Has it ever occured to you that you might be more in control of your life than some rich person?

Is it that they are more talented, more skilled, can manage things better?

All you want are no more billionaires and millionaires?

You can accomplish that without communism!

The fact that your average CEO wants dumbed-down summary reports from his subordinates because he's "too busy" to look at all the details just demonstrates the fact that the above claim that wealth does not equal intelligence is more often true than not.

I never claimed it did.

does to people who are competent in doing their job.

And those people are duly compensated for the work that they perform.

So what you're basically saying is that it's ok to be rich (however that may be defined) only if you're a TRULY talented hard-worker?

I can live with that.

An archist

8th October 2006, 20:37

No, I respect people, regardless of their class.

An archist

8th October 2006, 20:37

EDIT: double post

R_P_A_S

8th October 2006, 23:47

Originally posted by [email protected] 7 2006, 08:33 PM
i don't know why anyone would respect someone for just being poor. its not like its difficult or something.
how can anyone respect a prick like you?

Jazzratt

9th October 2006, 01:30

Originally posted by R_P_A_S+Oct 8 2006, 08:48 PM--> (R_P_A_S @ Oct 8 2006, 08:48 PM)
[email protected] 7 2006, 08:33 PM
i don't know why anyone would respect someone for just being poor. its not like its difficult or something.
how can anyone respect a prick like you? [/b]
You may have noticed that no one really does. He's just a prize twat on a message board.

Lamanov

9th October 2006, 01:31

:mellow:

This is why I don't even look into OI.

Raj Radical

9th October 2006, 04:59

Capitalist Lawyer, you adress us like we are all some rich stoned college kids.

I would say 90% of us are working class, we respect them because we relate to them.

Although I also have infinite respect for the commies who come from comfy bourgeois backgrounds/lifestyles.

We are all human beings for fucks sake.

thisguyisatotaljerk

9th October 2006, 10:37

I would especially like to hear from the the posters who actually do benefit from capitalism and aren't "wallowing in the shit" and surviving (or your parents and family) only on a wage paying job.

How did the winners on this board, arrive at their views?

I have always respected workers. They have a job to accomplish and generally do so without fuss.

I consider communists actually do emphasise with the 'sufferings' of workers, real or imagined, which is something I have never been quite able to understand considering workers in most countries have it way easier than their bosses, upon whom I shower my sympathy.

Communists and Unions in general have a way of stifling debate and acting like petty surrogate hierarchies which strangle production and dock workers' pay.

There are many people I know who would like to tell their union leaders to 'get-stuffed'. Were I a worker I would too. Communists may want to help workers, but refuse to allow workers to control their own destinies and have their own ideas. In this, Unions de-humanise their members and treat them like dumbasses.

Jazzratt:

Implying that people who aren't rich wankers are 'losers'. You're a complete pisspipe.

From your response I take it you're one of the 'losers'? How surprising given your primitive argumentative style and all round lack of decorum.

Colonelguppy:

i don't know why anyone would respect someone for just being poor. its not like its difficult or something.
An astute observation which is beyond the cognitive function of 90% of the inhabitants of this abode. I personally cannot respect someone who do not respect themself. This of course highlights the fundumental tenet of of communism - "Kick the achiever and let the uneracheiver steal his work" seems to be the modus opperandi of these guys. To get the ultimate reward, one should basically sit on his ass. Like that sort of society is gonna acheive anything.

VonClausewitz

9th October 2006, 20:11

I grew up in possibly the most working-class place on earth, got out of it with a little hard graft, and frankly am bloody glad of it. The 'working class' that I grew up with were half alcoholic, half snobbishly proud of their status, and fiercley right wing. You can't contradict experience, and frankly, I have no respect for those kinds of people. Especially since now so much of them are turning into chav things that have little respect for the rest of society.

So in short - No, why should I, they show no compassion for one of their own that pulled himself out the land of council-houses, drink, and minimum wage jobs. Though I never got rid of the drink, I am at university, and will have a decent life when I finish my course - not due to capitalism, but due to hard work.

If people want to stay on the bottom, fine, but if they complain while they're there, that's just insulting to those who've dragged themselves up.

t_wolves_fan

9th October 2006, 20:27

I seriously doubt any capitalist here either doesn't have working-class roots or doesn't know friends or family who are working class. I think we all know why those people are working class, as well.

Dr. Rosenpenis

9th October 2006, 20:38

Good observation, T wolves fan.
Why are those people working-class? According to your own analyses of the capitalism paradigm, they're mere workers because they want, right?

pastradamus

9th October 2006, 21:43

I respect anybody with a mind of human morality. That is to say anybody who wants to actually notice that some people have it worse off than others. Capitalists largely ignore this fact.

t_wolves_fan

9th October 2006, 22:33

Originally posted by [email protected] 9 2006, 06:44 PM
I respect anybody with a mind of human morality. That is to say anybody who wants to actually notice that some people have it worse off than others. Capitalists largely ignore this fact.
I don't ignore this fact.

I reject the communist premise that these people are all in the condition they are in for the same reason (because it's false), that it's impossible for them to improve their lives (because it's false), and that they all share substantial individual characteristics in common merely because of their current (i.e. snapshot in time) socio-economic class (because that too is false).

Get this through your head: disagreement with your premises and remedies does not mean I hate the poor.

t_wolves_fan

9th October 2006, 22:37

Originally posted by Dr. [email protected] 9 2006, 05:39 PM
Good observation, T wolves fan.
Why are those people working-class? According to your own analyses of the capitalism paradigm, they're mere workers because they want, right?
No, they are not working class merely because of "want". They are "working class" because of various combinations of:

Their intelligence
Their drive/interest in changing
Their desired field
Opportunities in their geographic area
Their happiness with where they are

Different mixes for different people. It's not as simple as saying "they're working class because they're dumb" or "they're working class because the capitalists repress them OMG!!Z!!!".

colonelguppy

9th October 2006, 22:38

Originally posted by Jazzratt+Oct 7 2006, 04:37 PM--> (Jazzratt @ Oct 7 2006, 04:37 PM)
[email protected] 7 2006, 08:33 PM
i don't know why anyone would respect someone for just being poor. its not like its difficult or something.
And today's award for most empty headed and poorly thought out post goes to Colonelguppy for this vile piece of shite.

If you work for minimum wage, support a family and try to keep up with payments on your house and vehicle and then say "this isn't difficult", then you should get treated for delusion.

Also if you're implying it's harder to be rich, then I'm afriad your bourgeoise whining won't find a sympathetic ear here. Sorry but "I had to choose between firing 50 workers for striking or actually *SHOCK HORROR* treating them like they were members of the same species as me today" does not compare to "I had to choose between continuing to work on a wage that barely pays for my food and housing or risking losing it all by going on strike." in terms of difficult choices. Nor does "Signing some employment slips and delegating any real work to other people" does not compare to "I had to spend all day doing heavy lifting at the behest of some fat wanker" in terms of difficult days, hell it doesn't even compare to "I had to spend all day entering data of no direct consequence to me into a computer for somone I hate, surrounded by people I hate, in an environment that makes me want to kill myself.". [/b]
no its easy to achieve the being poor and its harder to achieve being rich, i wasn't speaking of the percieved comfort of living for poor people.

colonelguppy

9th October 2006, 22:44

Originally posted by R_P_A_S+Oct 8 2006, 03:48 PM--> (R_P_A_S @ Oct 8 2006, 03:48 PM)
[email protected] 7 2006, 08:33 PM
i don't know why anyone would respect someone for just being poor. its not like its difficult or something.
how can anyone respect a prick like you? [/b]
i think people dislike me on this board because i'm shortwinded and therfore people asusme all sorts of nasty things about me for no reason at all.

either that or everyone else is just a prick, i'm not sure.

Jazzratt

9th October 2006, 22:48

Originally posted by [email protected] 9 2006, 07:38 AM

I would especially like to hear from the the posters who actually do benefit from capitalism and aren't "wallowing in the shit" and surviving (or your parents and family) only on a wage paying job.

How did the winners on this board, arrive at their views?

I have always respected workers. They have a job to accomplish and generally do so without fuss.

I consider communists actually do emphasise with the 'sufferings' of workers, real or imagined, which is something I have never been quite able to understand considering workers in most countries have it way easier than their bosses, upon whom I shower my sympathy.
You got any evidence that the boss works harder? Sorry but telling somone to lift something doesn't take as much effort as actually lifting the thing yourself. If you bring up 'Intellectual work' as your defense remember that intellectual workers: Teachers, Office grunts and so on, are also proles. The higher up you are the less work you have to do, the more of a useless wanker you are.

Communists and Unions in general have a way of stifling debate and acting like petty surrogate hierarchies which strangle production and dock workers' pay. What the fuck are you talking about "dock workers pay" - have you started thinking of the bosses half way through your empty headed statement?

There are many people I know who would like to tell their union leaders to 'get-stuffed'. Were I a worker I would too. Communists may want to help workers, but refuse to allow workers to control their own destinies and have their own ideas. In this, Unions de-humanise their members and treat them like dumbasses. Most unions are corrupt, but a genuine run worker union IS the workers controlling their destiny. So you can take your stupid beleif that your personal experience with corrupt unions relates in anyway to a truly communist union or society and ram it sideways up your arse.

Jazzratt:

Implying that people who aren't rich wankers are 'losers'. You're a complete pisspipe.

From your response I take it you're one of the 'losers'? How surprising given your primitive argumentative style and all round lack of decorum. I guess I would be a 'loser' by our pisspipe friend's definition, but if that's what he thinks being a loser is then I'm fucking proud of it. My 'primitive arguing style', I'm sorry if I don't spend all my time waffling on and on about shit when I can just as easily get straight to the point. Also, many many :lol: s at "general lack of decorum" as if you deserve any you stupid lump of shit.

Colonelguppy:

i don't know why anyone would respect someone for just being poor. its not like its difficult or something.
An astute observation which is beyond the cognitive function of 90% of the inhabitants of this abode. "Inhabitants of this abode", sorry mate this is a message board, not a place of residence. Unless you're refering to the group of headcases that would choose to live with you and not just stab you repeatedly in the face.

I personally cannot respect someone who do not respect themself. This of course highlights the fundumental tenet of of communism - "Kick the achiever and let the uneracheiver steal his work" seems to be the modus opperandi of these guys. To get the ultimate reward, one should basically sit on his ass. Like that sort of society is gonna acheive anything. Wrong again, your assesmant of communism is flawed. I would tell you to try again, but I'm afriad of the kind of idiocy you'd spew. "Kick the achiever" - what you mean by taking the fruits of their labour, giving them the finger and a tiny percentage of the actual value of their work? "let the underachiever steal his work" - What, in the way a boss steals from his employees?

...why haven't you decided to fuck off yet?

t_wolves_fan

9th October 2006, 22:57

Originally posted by [email protected] 9 2006, 07:49 PM

You got any evidence that the boss works harder?

I am in intellectual work not manual, but in all my experience I can tell you that yes, the boss works harder.

What evidence do you have the boss never works harder or even as hard?

Sorry but telling somone to lift something doesn't take as much effort as actually lifting the thing yourself. If you bring up 'Intellectual work' as your defense remember that intellectual workers: Teachers, Office grunts and so on, are also proles. The higher up you are the less work you have to do, the more of a useless wanker you are.

Did you ever stop to think for a moment that in many cases the people who are "higher up" did the "lower down" work harder than anyone else for a long time, and now do different work that is perhaps not as physically hard but equally as challenging?

Or do you assume that us capitalists merely clone one another and install each other in the board room?

Jazzratt

9th October 2006, 23:04

Originally posted by [email protected] 9 2006, 07:58 PM
I am in intellectual work not manual, but in all my experience I can tell you that yes, the boss works harder.

What evidence do you have the boss never works harder or even as hard?
Simple really, the fact that most workers are utterly ashattered at the end of a day of work (manual or otherwise), whislt the boss is fine to piss away his hours as he pleases, without really being that tired.

Sorry but telling somone to lift something doesn't take as much effort as actually lifting the thing yourself. If you bring up 'Intellectual work' as your defense remember that intellectual workers: Teachers, Office grunts and so on, are also proles. The higher up you are the less work you have to do, the more of a useless wanker you are.

Did you ever stop to think for a moment that in many cases the people who are "higher up" did the "lower down" work harder than anyone else for a long time, and now do different work that is perhaps not as physically hard but equally as challenging? I thinks those higher up have simply exploited the system is such a way as to land themselves with the cushy, low effort, high pay jobs.

Or do you assume that us capitalists merely clone one another and install each other in the board room? Nope, but you sure seem loathe to give postions of power to those not of your disgusting kind.

bloody_capitalist_sham

9th October 2006, 23:18

But I thought that's not what communism is about?

It's just a theory about history. So what's with all of this rhetoric about a "more just society"?

Well marxism, or historical materialism is a material account of history in which economic class is one of the primary motivators of change.

Communism is a desired future society in which there are no classes.

Marx observed that the working class had the capability, precisely because of their class status in society, to sieze control of their workplace, and form a state based on their own needs.

Marxists think that classes act in their own intrests and so class conflict occurs.

A more just society, for the workers is communism/socialism.

colonelguppy

9th October 2006, 23:22

there's no such thing as an upper management "low effort" job.

Jazzratt

10th October 2006, 00:01

Originally posted by [email protected] 9 2006, 08:23 PM
there's no such thing as an upper management "low effort" job.
and this is why you're caged with all the other idiots.

t_wolves_fan

10th October 2006, 00:10

Originally posted by [email protected] 9 2006, 08:05 PM

Simple really, the fact that most workers are utterly ashattered at the end of a day of work (manual or otherwise), whislt the boss is fine to piss away his hours as he pleases, without really being that tired.

To what extent have you actually witnessed this, versus reading or hearing about it (or assuming it)?

I thinks those higher up have simply exploited the system is such a way as to land themselves with the cushy, low effort, high pay jobs.

Same general question. Explain your personal experience in this regard, including examples from your own employment.

Nope, but you sure seem loathe to give postions of power to those not of your disgusting kind.

I've generally seen the best employees get promoted. Have you witnessed or experienced different?

colonelguppy

10th October 2006, 00:36

Originally posted by Jazzratt+Oct 9 2006, 04:02 PM--> (Jazzratt @ Oct 9 2006, 04:02 PM)
[email protected] 9 2006, 08:23 PM
there's no such thing as an upper management "low effort" job.
and this is why you're caged with all the other idiots. [/b]
brilliant retort.

thisguyisatotaljerk

10th October 2006, 12:52

JAZZRATT

You got any evidence that the boss works harder? Sorry but telling somone to lift something doesn't take as much effort as actually lifting the thing yourself. If you bring up 'Intellectual work' as your defense remember that intellectual workers: Teachers, Office grunts and so on, are also proles. The higher up you are the less work you have to do, the more of a useless wanker you are.

There is manifold evidence that bosses work harder. Just look around you. Who is there before work starts, and after the workers knock off? Who works 15 hour days? Not the workers. This is a fact.

What the fuck are you talking about "dock workers pay" - have you started thinking of the bosses half way through your empty headed statement?
Its called union fees or something. I don't know exactly since I've never had a job.

Most unions are corrupt, but a genuine run worker union IS the workers controlling their destiny. So you can take your stupid beleif that your personal experience with corrupt unions relates in anyway to a truly communist union or society and ram it sideways up your arse.
Look, Unions are ALL corrupt and lazy. In a TRULY communist union, the greedy people I was speaking about my thread, "when the communism comes..." will merely rise to the surface, take control of the union and institute corruption. Do you honestly think this won't happen? JEEEZZZZ.

I guess I would be a 'loser' by our pisspipe friend's definition, but if that's what he thinks being a loser is then I'm fucking proud of it. My 'primitive arguing style', I'm sorry if I don't spend all my time waffling on and on about shit when I can just as easily get straight to the point. Also, many many laugh.gif s at "general lack of decorum" as if you deserve any you stupid lump of shit.
Your attitude needs smartening up right now boy. I advise you to buff up some shoes, dress sharp and go and get a job right this minute instead of wasting your life arguing on an internet forum about communism and carrying on like an all round retard.

"Inhabitants of this abode", sorry mate this is a message board, not a place of residence. Unless you're refering to the group of headcases that would choose to live with you and not just stab you repeatedly in the face.
This place is like an abode insofar as it is a virtual community. I see nothing wrong with my statement.

Wrong again, your assesmant of communism is flawed. I would tell you to try again, but I'm afriad of the kind of idiocy you'd spew. "Kick the achiever" - what you mean by taking the fruits of their labour, giving them the finger and a tiny percentage of the actual value of their work? "let the underachiever steal his work" - What, in the way a boss steals from his employees?
Bosses don't steal from their employees. Many workers are too stupid to set up their own businesses, so attach like parasites to employers. The discrepancy between the work done and the work paid for is voluntarily arbitrated by the worker when he takes the job, making it a sort of "stupidity levy".

...why haven't you decided to fuck off yet?
I will when you Jazzratt have learnt your lesson .... boy.

Matty_UK

10th October 2006, 14:52

Originally posted by t_wolves_fan+Oct 9 2006, 09:11 PM--> (t_wolves_fan @ Oct 9 2006, 09:11 PM)
[email protected] 9 2006, 08:05 PM

Simple really, the fact that most workers are utterly ashattered at the end of a day of work (manual or otherwise), whislt the boss is fine to piss away his hours as he pleases, without really being that tired.

To what extent have you actually witnessed this, versus reading or hearing about it (or assuming it)? [/b]
He's experienced it, maybe? If you've actually had a proper manual job before it's fairly obvious pretty quick.

Jazzratt

10th October 2006, 14:57

Originally posted by [email protected] 9 2006, 09:11 PM

Simple really, the fact that most workers are utterly ashattered at the end of a day of work (manual or otherwise), whislt the boss is fine to piss away his hours as he pleases, without really being that tired.

To what extent have you actually witnessed this, versus reading or hearing about it (or assuming it)?
Being that most people I know work for a living, and that I can tell when somone is absolutley shagged out after a hard day at work. I also see the bourgeoise people living the good life outside of work, showing that not only do they have more money to piss away, and more time in which do do said pissing but they are also considerably less tired.

I thinks those higher up have simply exploited the system is such a way as to land themselves with the cushy, low effort, high pay jobs.

Same general question. Explain your personal experience in this regard, including examples from your own employment. The process is called 'promotion', you lick enough arse you too can have the nice jobs. They put in a little more effort at work for a little while, crawl up their employe's arse - then lo and behold they suddenly have to put in much less effort. Parasitic fuckers that they are.

Nope, but you sure seem loathe to give postions of power to those not of your disgusting kind.

I've generally seen the best employees get promoted. Have you witnessed or experienced different? I've only ever seen people with a bourgeoise mentality in bourgeoise positions. Generally it's the people with the best relationship with their employer that gets promoted.

Jazzratt

10th October 2006, 15:09

Originally posted by thisguyisatotaljerk+Oct 10 2006, 09:53 AM--> (thisguyisatotaljerk @ Oct 10 2006, 09:53 AM) JAZZRATT

You got any evidence that the boss works harder? Sorry but telling somone to lift something doesn't take as much effort as actually lifting the thing yourself. If you bring up 'Intellectual work' as your defense remember that intellectual workers: Teachers, Office grunts and so on, are also proles. The higher up you are the less work you have to do, the more of a useless wanker you are.

There is manifold evidence that bosses work harder. Just look around you. Who is there before work starts, and after the workers knock off? Who works 15 hour days? Not the workers. This is a fact. [/b]
What exactly is the boss doing with this mythical 15 hour work day? Delegating any real work to other people and counting his money.

What the fuck are you talking about "dock workers pay" - have you started thinking of the bosses half way through your empty headed statement?
Its called union fees or something. I don't know exactly since I've never had a job. THat's stupid fucking reasoning mate, by that logic Landlords dock the pay of workers who are living in their property (out of interest their simply stealing the money. Docking pay is something entirely different and can only be done by a boss.). I also strongly suspected you'd never worked a day in your life.

Most unions are corrupt, but a genuine run worker union IS the workers controlling their destiny. So you can take your stupid beleif that your personal experience with corrupt unions relates in anyway to a truly communist union or society and ram it sideways up your arse.
Look, Unions are ALL corrupt and lazy. No their not, present me with a shred of evidence for that, then I may take you sweriously.
In a TRULY communist union, the greedy people I was speaking about my thread, "when the communism comes..." will merely rise to the surface, take control of the union and institute corruption. Do you honestly think this won't happen? JEEEZZZZ. Where will these greedy people come from? You've merely pulled a concept out of your arse, if you look at that thread, in which you were roundly beaten on every point, you'd already know the answer to most of your stupid critisiscms.

I guess I would be a 'loser' by our pisspipe friend's definition, but if that's what he thinks being a loser is then I'm fucking proud of it. My 'primitive arguing style', I'm sorry if I don't spend all my time waffling on and on about shit when I can just as easily get straight to the point. Also, many many laugh.gif s at "general lack of decorum" as if you deserve any you stupid lump of shit.
Your attitude needs smartening up right now boy. I advise you to buff up some shoes, dress sharp and go and get a job right this minute instead of wasting your life arguing on an internet forum about communism and carrying on like an all round retard. :lol: Terribly sorry to resort to ad hominiem (then again it is in response to your ridiculous ad hominiem above:

Captain Short Term Memory Loss
I've never had a job. Now let's look at this in detial, yuo that has never had a job is advising me who has, to go and get one? And you don't smell the hypocrisy?

"Inhabitants of this abode", sorry mate this is a message board, not a place of residence. Unless you're refering to the group of headcases that would choose to live with you and not just stab you repeatedly in the face.
This place is like an abode insofar as it is a virtual community. I see nothing wrong with my statement. It's a virtual community not a virtual place of residence. Anyway the point is purely semantic, I was merely taking the piss.

Wrong again, your assesmant of communism is flawed. I would tell you to try again, but I'm afriad of the kind of idiocy you'd spew. "Kick the achiever" - what you mean by taking the fruits of their labour, giving them the finger and a tiny percentage of the actual value of their work? "let the underachiever steal his work" - What, in the way a boss steals from his employees?
Bosses don't steal from their employees. Many workers are too stupid to set up their own businesses, so attach like parasites to employers. The discrepancy between the work done and the work paid for is voluntarily arbitrated by the worker when he takes the job, making it a sort of "stupidity levy". They steal from their employees in that they are in a situation of power over thir employees thanks to luck and the intrinisc coercion of capitalis, they then use that position of power to take money for the fruits of somone elses labour and then give back to the labourer a fraction of its value.

...why haven't you decided to fuck off yet?
I will when you Jazzratt have learnt your lesson .... boy. Oh I have learned my lesson, never bother arguing with cretins they always bring up stupid points that have no bearing on the argument. Also, most of them are too thin skinned to take a few insults.

Matty_UK

10th October 2006, 15:11

Originally posted by [email protected] 10 2006, 09:53 AM

.

There is manifold evidence that bosses work harder. Just look around you. Who is there before work starts, and after the workers knock off? Who works 15 hour days? Not the workers. This is a fact.

My boss spends a good deal of time hiding from customers in his office, smoking and sitting around, or in his apartment above the workplace doing god knows what. His job involves buying new stock and giving people jobs to do for him; and not a lot else. It's not exactly strenuous.

Its called union fees or something. I don't know exactly since I've never had a job.

You don't HAVE to join the union, you can choose to pay union fees if you want the protection offered by that union. But most unions nowadays are bourgeois institutions that have no radical role whatsoever.

Look, Unions are ALL corrupt and lazy. In a TRULY communist union, the greedy people I was speaking about my thread, "when the communism comes..." will merely rise to the surface, take control of the union and institute corruption. Do you honestly think this won't happen? JEEEZZZZ.

The IWW has been around for a good few decades, must be approaching a century by now, and this hasn't happened has it?

Your attitude needs smartening up right now boy. I advise you to buff up some shoes, dress sharp and go and get a job right this minute instead of wasting your life arguing on an internet forum about communism and carrying on like an all round retard.

You don't have a job either, what are you talking about.

And what makes you think Jazzratt doesn't have a job anyway? The majority of communists are workers; if I was in a position where I didn't have to work to survive, I probably wouldn't be a communist. And if he is unemployed it's not out of choice.

Bosses don't steal from their employees.

Hypothetical situation. A worker in a Chinese sweatshop creates maybe $200 a day worth of goods for his employer. He gets back for this a $2 living wage.

Is this not theft and exploitation to you?

Many workers are too stupid to set up their own businesses,

Too stupid or too poor?
Are you really so ignorant to truly believe that capitalism could work if every single person ran their own business?

so attach like parasites to employers.

Read a little bit about the historical birth of capitalism. The bourgeoisie forced people into a situation where they had to sell their labour to survive. Where would capitalists be without their workers to exploit?

The discrepancy between the work done and the work paid for is voluntarily arbitrated by the worker when he takes the job, making it a sort of "stupidity levy".

That's bullshit, there are no jobs other than a capitalist where the employer does not take most of the profit for him or herself. Most jobs for someone with no qualifications pay minimum wage or thereabouts so it's not like someone smarter can choose a higher paying job; and the higher paying jobs are difficult to get, especially if you have a history of not being your employers *****.

t_wolves_fan

10th October 2006, 16:35

Being that most people I know work for a living, and that I can tell when somone is absolutley shagged out after a hard day at work.

What experience do you have with bourgeoise people when they get home from work?

I also see the bourgeoise people living the good life outside of work, showing that not only do they have more money to piss away, and more time in which do do said pissing but they are also considerably less tired.

Mental labor will naturally be less physically taxing than manual labor.

I take it this means you are seeing bourgeoise people during business hours, which indicates you do not have a job yourself.

Did you ever stop to think that you are seeing them on their day off?

Explain your personal experience in this regard, including examples from your own employment. The process is called 'promotion', you lick enough arse you too can have the nice jobs. They put in a little more effort at work for a little while, crawl up their employe's arse - then lo and behold they suddenly have to put in much less effort. Parasitic fuckers that they are.

Try again. I asked for your specific experience related to promotion, not proclamations about how it works.

I've only ever seen people with a bourgeoise mentality in bourgeoise positions. Generally it's the people with the best relationship with their employer that gets promoted.

Again, based on what experience?

thisguyisatotaljerk

11th October 2006, 13:12

Jazzratt

What exactly is the boss doing with this mythical 15 hour work day? Delegating any real work to other people and counting his money.
Pretty much, if he wants to be mediocre. If he wants to be really rich however, he'll do lots of the work himself, which separates the true entrepreneurs from the flotscum.

THat's stupid fucking reasoning mate, by that logic Landlords dock the pay of workers who are living in their property (out of interest their simply stealing the money. Docking pay is something entirely different and can only be done by a boss.). I also strongly suspected you'd never worked a day in your life.
I think landlords don't steal the money, because they're providing accomodation, kind of like a hotel. Also the transaction is entirely voluntary so there is no theft going on. And I have worked, just never had a typical job working for an exploitative boss. I don't see the point. Long hours, low pay. I'll always work for myself thank you very much. And if workers weren't such lifelong losers, they would do the same and wages would go up from the lack of supply.

Where will these greedy people come from? You've merely pulled a concept out of your arse, if you look at that thread, in which you were roundly beaten on every point, you'd already know the answer to most of your stupid critisiscms.
Everyone is greedy. I don't need to pull that concept from anywhere. It's self evident to everybody. We are all greedy for money, sex and luxury. Don't say you aren't or I won't beleive you.

Now let's look at this in detial, yuo that has never had a job is advising me who has, to go and get one? And you don't smell the hypocrisy?
1) I don't work for anyone b/c I have narcissistic personality disorder and the thought of someone being above me in a workplace would frankly infuriate me and drive me more insane than I already am.

2) I have plenty of money so thank God I don't need to work for eva and eva.

3) It was just some friendly advice. I'm no hypocrite.

They steal from their employees in that they are in a situation of power over thir employees thanks to luck and the intrinisc coercion of capitalis, they then use that position of power to take money for the fruits of somone elses labour and then give back to the labourer a fraction of its value.
Yeah, but you're ignoring the fact that:
1)The transaction is voluntary so there is no theft
2)That worker is a class A sucker so they are going to be exploited anyway.

Oh I have learned my lesson, never bother arguing with cretins they always bring up stupid points that have no bearing on the argument. Also, most of them are too thin skinned to take a few insults.
No, I can take any insult.

thisguyisatotaljerk

11th October 2006, 13:23

My boss spends a good deal of time hiding from customers in his office, smoking and sitting around, or in his apartment above the workplace doing god knows what. His job involves buying new stock and giving people jobs to do for him; and not a lot else. It's not exactly strenuous.
I don't blame the poor guy. In fact, I would do the same. Why work when you can get suckers to do it for you?

You don't HAVE to join the union, you can choose to pay union fees if you want the protection offered by that union. But most unions nowadays are bourgeois institutions that have no radical role whatsoever.
That's right! They're Bourgeoise and corrupt.

The IWW has been around for a good few decades, must be approaching a century by now, and this hasn't happened has it?
I suppose those guys feel they have a legacy of some sort to uphold.

You don't have a job either, what are you talking about.

And what makes you think Jazzratt doesn't have a job anyway? The majority of communists are workers; if I was in a position where I didn't have to work to survive, I probably wouldn't be a communist. And if he is unemployed it's not out of choice.
Well, I might be a communist if I was poor, like you say, it's out of capitalistic self-interest we choose our ideologies.

Hypothetical situation. A worker in a Chinese sweatshop creates maybe $200 a day worth of goods for his employer. He gets back for this a $2 living wage.

Is this not theft and exploitation to you?
Like, who cares man? If someone is dumb enough to be exploited, its their perogative to have that happen to them.

Too stupid or too poor?
Are you really so ignorant to truly believe that capitalism could work if every single person ran their own business?
Well, everyone used to own their own business back in Medieval towns. I don't see why it can't happen again.

Read a little bit about the historical birth of capitalism. The bourgeoisie forced people into a situation where they had to sell their labour to survive. Where would capitalists be without their workers to exploit?
Consider that a worker is like a prostitute selling himself to his employer - and is therefore competing with other prostitutes. There are so many multitudes of hookers, so you can have an auction and drive the prices down - so their pay is low.

That's bullshit, there are no jobs other than a capitalist where the employer does not take most of the profit for him or herself. Most jobs for someone with no qualifications pay minimum wage or thereabouts so it's not like someone smarter can choose a higher paying job; and the higher paying jobs are difficult to get, especially if you have a history of not being your employers *****.
That's why its dumb to work a minumum wage job. You aren't actually getting anything out of it, but so many people want to do it - how can we capitalists refuse. On the other hand, there is so much supply that... what do they want to be paid like fucken CEOs?

Matty_UK

11th October 2006, 14:52

Originally posted by [email protected] 11 2006, 10:24 AM
Like, who cares man? If someone is dumb enough to be exploited, its their perogative to have that happen to them.

...

Well, everyone used to own their own business back in Medieval towns. I don't see why it can't happen again.

...

Consider that a worker is like a prostitute selling himself to his employer - and is therefore competing with other prostitutes. There are so many multitudes of hookers, so you can have an auction and drive the prices down - so their pay is low.

...

That's why its dumb to work a minumum wage job. You aren't actually getting anything out of it, but so many people want to do it - how can we capitalists refuse. On the other hand, there is so much supply that... what do they want to be paid like fucken CEOs?
You don't seem to understand that the proletariat MUST sell his labour in order to survive. You've explained yourself that wages are low because of the proletarians depend on the capitalist to survive;

Consider that a worker is like a prostitute selling himself to his employer - and is therefore competing with other prostitutes. There are so many multitudes of hookers, so you can have an auction and drive the prices down - so their pay is low.

At least I think that's what you're saying it wasn't very coherent. If there workers are desperate enough to work for less, which there will be, they will get employed over unskilled workers who want high wages.

The option of finding a different job isn't available to everyone; there are limited positions in the jobs with higher pay and better work conditions. Not everyone can get these jobs. People working a minimum wage job like myself DO NOT HAVE A CHOICE. We need pay or we die and as I haven't (as yet) got any useful qualifications I'm forced to work in one of these jobs.

But I'm also not dumb and the proles who aren't dumb are the ones who see that they can only have strength in ORGANISING to take on their employers.

And as for-

Well, everyone used to own their own business back in Medieval towns. I don't see why it can't happen again.

No everyone did not own their own business in medieval towns.

And if they did how exactly could you make that happen? To do that you'd have to first overthrow capitalism as it exists today-where would everyone get the materials to run their own little workshop when raw materials are owned almost always by huge corporations? And even then over time capital will simply accumulate again, some businesses will cease to exist while some grow, and we'd relive the last few centuries again.

And mass production made possible today by large factories means it would be impossible to have small workshops responsible for industry without a huge step backwards-and the existence of large factories requires people to sell themselves to the capitalists.

ZX3

11th October 2006, 15:46

Originally posted by [email protected] 11 2006, 11:53 AM

The option of finding a different job isn't available to everyone; there are limited positions in the jobs with higher pay and better work conditions. Not everyone can get these jobs. People working a minimum wage job like myself DO NOT HAVE A CHOICE. We need pay or we die and as I haven't (as yet) got any useful qualifications I'm forced to work in one of these jobs.

What the heck are you talking about? Are you communists/socialists/ technocrats really so lacking in knowledge of capitalism and life?

First of all, EVERYONE has to work to survive. Even that guy in the apartment who sits around and has peoplembuy stock for him has to work,. or he won't get any money and will die.

Secondly, this circumstance will not change in a socialist/communist/technocratic community. You will still have to work. Period. if you don't work, you will die, or be expelled. Other socilaists/communists/technocratists on this forum have been quite clear about this. I understand people may not want to work, but the reality will be that people will have to work. I understand people may not be working RIGHT NOW, where they want to be working, but that circumstance will be true in a socialist/communist/technocratic community as well (will somebody give up his or her job just so someone else can have it? Doubtful. These things take time. Its called life. Where does someone who has no useful qualifications expect to work in a socialist/communist/technocratic community? At the bottom, same as a capitalist one, where you learn. There is no way around it, my friend. Not even a socialist/communist/technocratic community can spare you starting out in life).

t_wolves_fan

11th October 2006, 16:16

Anyone seen the movie Clerks?

This thread reminds me of that movie. In it, Dante is a loser who works in a convenience store, and who dates one girl (Veronica) but dotes over his ex-girlfriend (Kaitlyn) who treated him like crap.

Dante spends the whole movie *****ing about his work situation. Randall and Veronica repeatedly tell him that at any time he could go find another job. Dante just complaints that they're lecturing him. Dante spends the whole movie *****ing about how he wants Kaitlyn (who he finds out is engaged), Randall tells Dante to take some initiative and dump Veronica to be with Kaitlyn if that's what he really wants.

At the very end, Dante complains that none of the events in the movie should have happened because he wasn't even supposed to be at work that day. Randall blows up and tells Dante that HE agreed to come into work that day, HE hasn't sacked up and gotten a new job, HE hasn't sacked up and dumped Veronica for Kaitlyn, and HE made a few decisions during the workday that had consequences. I think in the end Dante finally got the point: if you want change, you've got to seek it out and take the steps to make it happen. Life isn't going to do it for you.

The communists here are Dante, whining and *****ing about how life isn't fair, and it needs to be fixed for them RIGHT NOW. The capitalists are Randall.

Matty_UK

11th October 2006, 18:26

Originally posted by ZX3+Oct 11 2006, 12:47 PM--> (ZX3 @ Oct 11 2006, 12:47 PM)
[email protected] 11 2006, 11:53 AM

The option of finding a different job isn't available to everyone; there are limited positions in the jobs with higher pay and better work conditions. Not everyone can get these jobs. People working a minimum wage job like myself DO NOT HAVE A CHOICE. We need pay or we die and as I haven't (as yet) got any useful qualifications I'm forced to work in one of these jobs.

What the heck are you talking about? Are you communists/socialists/ technocrats really so lacking in knowledge of capitalism and life?

First of all, EVERYONE has to work to survive. Even that guy in the apartment who sits around and has peoplembuy stock for him has to work,. or he won't get any money and will die.

Secondly, this circumstance will not change in a socialist/communist/technocratic community. You will still have to work. Period. if you don't work, you will die, or be expelled. Other socilaists/communists/technocratists on this forum have been quite clear about this. I understand people may not want to work, but the reality will be that people will have to work. I understand people may not be working RIGHT NOW, where they want to be working, but that circumstance will be true in a socialist/communist/technocratic community as well (will somebody give up his or her job just so someone else can have it? Doubtful. These things take time. Its called life. Where does someone who has no useful qualifications expect to work in a socialist/communist/technocratic community? At the bottom, same as a capitalist one, where you learn. There is no way around it, my friend. Not even a socialist/communist/technocratic community can spare you starting out in life). [/b]
If you read my post it was a response to jerks assertion that people are stupid for working in minimum wage jobs. I was saying they have no choice to work those jobs, not that people won't have to do any work under communism.

Matty_UK

11th October 2006, 18:29

Originally posted by [email protected] 11 2006, 01:17 PM
Anyone seen the movie Clerks?

This thread reminds me of that movie. In it, Dante is a loser who works in a convenience store, and who dates one girl (Veronica) but dotes over his ex-girlfriend (Kaitlyn) who treated him like crap.

Dante spends the whole movie *****ing about his work situation. Randall and Veronica repeatedly tell him that at any time he could go find another job. Dante just complaints that they're lecturing him. Dante spends the whole movie *****ing about how he wants Kaitlyn (who he finds out is engaged), Randall tells Dante to take some initiative and dump Veronica to be with Kaitlyn if that's what he really wants.

At the very end, Dante complains that none of the events in the movie should have happened because he wasn't even supposed to be at work that day. Randall blows up and tells Dante that HE agreed to come into work that day, HE hasn't sacked up and gotten a new job, HE hasn't sacked up and dumped Veronica for Kaitlyn, and HE made a few decisions during the workday that had consequences. I think in the end Dante finally got the point: if you want change, you've got to seek it out and take the steps to make it happen. Life isn't going to do it for you.

The communists here are Dante, whining and *****ing about how life isn't fair, and it needs to be fixed for them RIGHT NOW. The capitalists are Randall.
I dunno if you're talking to me, but I am going to get a new job eventually I just need to work for this year to raise money for educational purposes. But some people haven't been brought up to value education and could likely be stuck in these jobs forever.

t_wolves_fan

11th October 2006, 18:34

Originally posted by [email protected] 11 2006, 03:30 PM
I dunno if you're talking to me, but I am going to get a new job eventually I just need to work for this year to raise money for educational purposes. But some people haven't been brought up to value education and could likely be stuck in these jobs forever.
Who's fault is that?

How difficult is it to learn that hard work + motivation + ingenuity = more success?

Maybe some of those people are like Randall, who says when Dante counters that his work situation is no better that he's "comfortable with his situation for now."

Matty_UK

11th October 2006, 19:58

Originally posted by t_wolves_fan+Oct 11 2006, 03:35 PM--> (t_wolves_fan @ Oct 11 2006, 03:35 PM)
[email protected] 11 2006, 03:30 PM
I dunno if you're talking to me, but I am going to get a new job eventually I just need to work for this year to raise money for educational purposes. But some people haven't been brought up to value education and could likely be stuck in these jobs forever.
Who's fault is that?

How difficult is it to learn that hard work + motivation + ingenuity = more success?

Maybe some of those people are like Randall, who says when Dante counters that his work situation is no better that he's "comfortable with his situation for now." [/b]
There's not room for everyone in cushy jobs. Someone has to do the shit, I don't care if it's possible for one individual to get out of tedious underpaid work if it's impossible for the mass of people to be liberated. One person climbs out and someone else falls in their place. Sorry, but this bourgeois morality you espouse is just a delusional excuse for capitalism and does not wash with anyone who has not been brainwashed with it all their lives.

It's obvious you're someone completely alienated from the working class and with no understanding of them. I'm lucky because my parents have always encouraged me to stick in at school and not to rot in front of the TV all day but most working class people are not brought up like this, and are brought up with little motivation to do well at school (as well as inadequate educational resources compared to the rich kids) as there parents do not have high expectations of their kids. This is an inevitable part of capitalism and part of human behaviour so saying "well they should work harder" is bollocks. For working class people to negate their socialisation from their environment is impossible and you capitalists are not giving any realistic solutions to this other than your crap that they should pull themselves up by their bootstraps which does NOTHING to solve social problems for anyone but that individual.

t_wolves_fan

11th October 2006, 21:00

Originally posted by [email protected] 11 2006, 04:59 PM
There's not room for everyone in cushy jobs. Someone has to do the shit, I don't care if it's possible for one individual to get out of tedious underpaid work if it's impossible for the mass of people to be liberated. One person climbs out and someone else falls in their place. Sorry, but this bourgeois morality you espouse is just a delusional excuse for capitalism and does not wash with anyone who has not been brainwashed with it all their lives.

It's obvious you're someone completely alienated from the working class and with no understanding of them. I'm lucky because my parents have always encouraged me to stick in at school and not to rot in front of the TV all day but most working class people are not brought up like this, and are brought up with little motivation to do well at school (as well as inadequate educational resources compared to the rich kids) as there parents do not have high expectations of their kids. This is an inevitable part of capitalism and part of human behaviour so saying "well they should work harder" is bollocks. For working class people to negate their socialisation from their environment is impossible and you capitalists are not giving any realistic solutions to this other than your crap that they should pull themselves up by their bootstraps which does NOTHING to solve social problems for anyone but that individual.
Problem is sport you're talking to someone who grew up in conditions probably worse than yours.

No, there isn't room for everyone to have cushy jobs. That's unfortunate but not worrisome for 4 main reasons:

1. Not everyone is smart enough for those cushy jobs. But their children might be.
2. Not everyone is motivated enough to put themselves in position to get a cushy job. But their children might be.
3. Not everyone wants a cushy job. But their children might.
4. Some people's #1 priority is not making money or being in the upper class. Some people are quite happy being working class and find things such as faith or family to be more important. You don't respect these people. Or their children.

Matty_UK

11th October 2006, 22:18

Originally posted by t_wolves_fan+Oct 11 2006, 06:01 PM--> (t_wolves_fan @ Oct 11 2006, 06:01 PM)
[email protected] 11 2006, 04:59 PM
There's not room for everyone in cushy jobs. Someone has to do the shit, I don't care if it's possible for one individual to get out of tedious underpaid work if it's impossible for the mass of people to be liberated. One person climbs out and someone else falls in their place. Sorry, but this bourgeois morality you espouse is just a delusional excuse for capitalism and does not wash with anyone who has not been brainwashed with it all their lives.

It's obvious you're someone completely alienated from the working class and with no understanding of them. I'm lucky because my parents have always encouraged me to stick in at school and not to rot in front of the TV all day but most working class people are not brought up like this, and are brought up with little motivation to do well at school (as well as inadequate educational resources compared to the rich kids) as there parents do not have high expectations of their kids. This is an inevitable part of capitalism and part of human behaviour so saying "well they should work harder" is bollocks. For working class people to negate their socialisation from their environment is impossible and you capitalists are not giving any realistic solutions to this other than your crap that they should pull themselves up by their bootstraps which does NOTHING to solve social problems for anyone but that individual.
Problem is sport you're talking to someone who grew up in conditions probably worse than yours.

No, there isn't room for everyone to have cushy jobs. That's unfortunate but not worrisome for 4 main reasons:

1. Not everyone is smart enough for those cushy jobs. But their children might be.
2. Not everyone is motivated enough to put themselves in position to get a cushy job. But their children might be.
3. Not everyone wants a cushy job. But their children might.
4. Some people's #1 priority is not making money or being in the upper class. Some people are quite happy being working class and find things such as faith or family to be more important. You don't respect these people. Or their children. [/b]
In response to 1 and 2.

The people without skills to do complex jobs are always going to be the ones doing boring jobs. But these jobs would be a lot less soul destroying (and also more productive) if the workers were not having the fruits of their labour minimised by an exploitative boss, AND if they had a say over how their work is managed what is done with their produce.

There is no need for them to struggle to pay for transport, healthcare, essentials, rent or mortgage, debts etc while their employer does less demanding work (that might require some experience but the jobs of the employer do not require indispensable expertise, and could easily be done collectively by the workers) and I fail to see why not being motivated or clever enough (their intelligent and motivation is a product of their social conditions anyway, which communism would change) is sufficient reason to condemn them to a life of misery.

(Also many of them may be capable of doing other jobs, just not as capable as the ones who get the position)

And the proletariat is very unlikely to rise into the exploiting class if that's what you meant by cushy jobs, and becomes increasingly less likely as capitalism develops to have wealth more concentrated in an ever smaller section of society. So their children are less likely than them to get a cushy job if you meant a bourgeois or petty bourgeois job.

In response to 3 and 4.

I'm not interested in joining the bourgeoisie because I have a social conscience and would despise my peers, and I'm happy being working class but I also want to pay the bills, have plenty of leisure time and have luxuries. In fact, family being important is not a reason to stay in a crap working class job-it is a reason to get a better paid job to look after your kids. And I'm not talking about the ability to get a cushy upper class job because the chance of that is almost nil for most people. Getting a cushy working class job is what I mean and I'll be damned if there's anyone working class who isn't striving for that ESPECIALLY if they have family. So saying I don't respect those people is silly because those people don't exist.

And if they retreat into their faith rather than face reality then no, I have little respect for them.

t_wolves_fan

11th October 2006, 23:04

The people without skills to do complex jobs are always going to be the ones doing boring jobs. But these jobs would be a lot less soul destroying (and also more productive) if the workers were not having the fruits of their labour minimised by an exploitative boss, AND if they had a say over how their work is managed what is done with their produce.

How, specifically?

There is no need for them to struggle to pay for transport, healthcare, essentials, rent or mortgage, debts etc while their employer does less demanding work

This can all be accomplished without communism; but why should we have an ounce of sympathy for someone who racks up debts they cannot pay back if they live beyond their means?

I fail to see why not being motivated or clever enough (their intelligent and motivation is a product of their social conditions anyway, which communism would change) is sufficient reason to condemn them to a life of misery.

How would communism change their intelligence and motivation, specifically?

If someone knows how to improve their life but cannot be bothered to do it, why do they deserve the same benefits as someone who is motivated and productive?

(Also many of them may be capable of doing other jobs, just not as capable as the ones who get the position)

What is unfair about that?

And the proletariat is very unlikely to rise into the exploiting class if that's what you meant by cushy jobs, and becomes increasingly less likely as capitalism develops to have wealth more concentrated in an ever smaller section of society. So their children are less likely than them to get a cushy job if you meant a bourgeois or petty bourgeois job.

Class is not static no matter how much you wish it were. It may seem difficult because you haven't done it, or need to believe it can't be done, but it's actually quite easy.

I'm not interested in joining the bourgeoisie because I have a social conscience and would despise my peers, and I'm happy being working class but I also want to pay the bills, have plenty of leisure time and have luxuries.

So this is in effect all about you isn't it. You want to have what you want to have but can't be bothered to do anything you don't wish to do to actually achieve your desired ends.

In fact, family being important is not a reason to stay in a crap working class job-it is a reason to get a better paid job to look after your kids.

Because you say so? What about the numerous families that have only one working parent, who sacrifice money, material comfort and luxury to provide a stay at home parent? Are those people wrong? Who are you to tell them they're wrong?

And if they retreat into their faith rather than face reality then no, I have little respect for them.

So to summarize, you know better than other people do how their lives ought to operate. That about it?

Matty_UK

12th October 2006, 02:13

How, specifically?

How is getting more reward and having some control over how you conduct your work less soul destroying than getting a fraction of what you make for your boss while being told what to do, often inconsideratly?

This can all be accomplished without communism; but why should we have an ounce of sympathy for someone who racks up debts they cannot pay back if they live beyond their means?

You're ignorant, very few people can get a house without nearly a lifetime of debt to follow.

The proletariat cannot and will not be able to make life less of a struggle without a revolution. The minimum wage will always be the bare minimum to survive and continue working, and just striking for a wage increase will simply see capitalists raising their prices to compensate. Unless there's a revolution the cost of living for the proletariat is always going to be the same (in correlation to wages) despite any advances in production. For example buying your weekly shopping in Tescos could be a helluva lot cheaper if Tescos didn't destroy 40% of their food and if a good deal of the farms they get food from weren't left idle.

And that's not including the increasing cost of education, housing, public transport, and healthcare that will make everyone's life difficult.

If the problem of the proletariats daily struggle can be solved within the constraints of capitalism, please tell us how. It's clear that welfare states within capitalism cannot survive forever as they see investors looking elsewhere. The only solution is to make the money of these investors irrelevant by seizing the industry from the capitalists.

How would communism change their intelligence and motivation, specifically?

You don't answer my point but ok.

Specifically, I cannot tell the future but everyone being equal is bound to have some effect on the inferiority complex that is definitely part of what keeps the lumpenproletariat down.

If someone knows how to improve their life but cannot be bothered to do it, why do they deserve the same benefits as someone who is motivated and productive?

This morality, like all morality, stems from trying to make a set of rules that help society function better. There is no inherent reason for more productive workers to get a greater reward, other than it encourages other workers to be more productive. A more skilled worker in a communist society would likely get a higher reward from the community because it encourages workers to train-it has nothing to do with them somehow deserving it.
My point is; there is no point in putting unskilled workers through enormous difficulty in their day to day lives, as it is actually problems caused by capitalism that make things more difficult for them and forces them out of a job altogether. They should be materially secure and reap the benefits of advanced production that capitalism denies, and not being smart, (as if the bourgeoisie have any intelligence anyway...) motivated, or lucky is no reason to punish them.

What is unfair about that?

Nothings unfair about it, it's as fair as you can get if you're working within capitalism. But my point is it is not possible for everyone to escape drudgery, only some can do it and others must remain at the bottom.

Class is not static no matter how much you wish it were. It may seem difficult because you haven't done it, or need to believe it can't be done, but it's actually quite easy.

My sister goes to a university full of bourgeois public school kids. (who are horrible horrible disgusting people to her and in general) They have no intention of using their degree for anything other than vanity as they have connections so get given an employers job anyway. The boss chooses who succeeds him so nepotism rules the day in the bourgeois world, making it VERY difficult for someone working class to join the ranks of the bourgeois unless they have some sort of connections somehow.

Starting up your own business which then grows up into a huge corporation is something virtually impossible nowadays and increasingly so as you have to compete with established giants.

So this is in effect all about you isn't it. You want to have what you want to have but can't be bothered to do anything you don't wish to do to actually achieve your desired ends.

First fuck off-there's nothing wrong with wanting to live a comfortable life.

Second fuck off-ad hominems are stupid and you're wrong I don't wish to do anything to achieve my ends. I won't be working a shit job for very long because I do have a plan to get a good job and I'm working in a crap job to raise money for educational purposes first.

Because you say so? What about the numerous families that have only one working parent, who sacrifice money, material comfort and luxury to provide a stay at home parent? Are those people wrong? Who are you to tell them they're wrong?

OK so what's your point? You said, it's not a problem that not everyone can get a cushy job because some people don't want a cushy job and choose family over material wealth. Not being able to afford a babysitter doesn't mean they don't care about getting a better paid job.

This is ridiculous, you're claiming the working class like being exploited now and this is your evidence?

All the more reason to condemn capitalism!

So to summarize, you know better than other people do how their lives ought to operate. That about it?

Quit claiming the moral highground it's annoying. If they want to be meek fine but they won't inherit shit and won't get my respect.

thisguyisatotaljerk

12th October 2006, 02:52

You're ignorant, very few people can get a house without nearly a lifetime of debt to follow.
OH! Minimum wage workers like yourself deserve a HOUSE! With all the amenities as well I bet! Yeah, why not throw in a swimming pool and a five car garage, all to be paid for by the generous government! Wow, your system really is a utopia on Earth!

Matty_UK

12th October 2006, 13:45

Originally posted by [email protected] 11 2006, 11:53 PM

You're ignorant, very few people can get a house without nearly a lifetime of debt to follow.
OH! Minimum wage workers like yourself deserve a HOUSE! With all the amenities as well I bet! Yeah, why not throw in a swimming pool and a five car garage, all to be paid for by the generous government! Wow, your system really is a utopia on Earth!
Hmm....

t_wolves_fan

12th October 2006, 19:27

How, specifically?

How is getting more reward and having some control over how you conduct your work less soul destroying than getting a fraction of what you make for your boss while being told what to do, often inconsideratly?

I meant how specifically would this work. But it doesn't matter, any worker over time will have opportunity to do exactly these things, or even to go into business for themselves.

You're ignorant, very few people can get a house without nearly a lifetime of debt to follow.

They can rent. Problem solved.

The proletariat cannot and will not be able to make life less of a struggle without a revolution.

But individuals within the proletarian can and do. While coming up with a system where they all do instantly sounds great, the basic theory has a lot of holes and the few times it's been attempted in practice have been human disasters.

The minimum wage will always be the bare minimum to survive and continue working, and just striking for a wage increase will simply see capitalists raising their prices to compensate. Unless there's a revolution the cost of living for the proletariat is always going to be the same (in correlation to wages) despite any advances in production.

Yet it will not always be the same people.

For example buying your weekly shopping in Tescos could be a helluva lot cheaper if Tescos didn't destroy 40% of their food and if a good deal of the farms they get food from weren't left idle.

Helluva lot cheaper food would result in increased demand which would tap out supply, leading to a black market. You're simply trading one problem for another.

And that's not including the increasing cost of education, housing, public transport, and healthcare that will make everyone's life difficult.

If the problem of the proletariats daily struggle can be solved within the constraints of capitalism, please tell us how. It's clear that welfare states within capitalism cannot survive forever as they see investors looking elsewhere. The only solution is to make the money of these investors irrelevant by seizing the industry from the capitalists.

A welfare state is not required, though a safety net is. Charity picks up much of the slack. I believe you are from England, which is far more of a welfare state than is the U.S. Are people starving in the streets on a wide basis?

Specifically, I cannot tell the future but everyone being equal is bound to have some effect on the inferiority complex that is definitely part of what keeps the lumpenproletariat down.

Lolz. You could very easily breed resentment among the educated and productive because they see no benefit from their work vis-a-vis the less productive.

Everyone cannot be made to be equal. It's a pipe dream.

This morality, like all morality, stems from trying to make a set of rules that help society function better. There is no inherent reason for more productive workers to get a greater reward, other than it encourages other workers to be more productive. A more skilled worker in a communist society would likely get a higher reward from the community because it encourages workers to train-it has nothing to do with them somehow deserving it.

You just contradicted yourself. You claim there's no good reason for more productive people to get more of a reward, but even in your system more productive people will get a better reward to serve as an example to the rest of the workers.

You just explained the inherent reason that more productive people deserve to be rewarded at a higher level.

My point is; there is no point in putting unskilled workers through enormous difficulty in their day to day lives,

I agree, which is why I am not a fan of pure, laissez-faire capitalism.

They should be materially secure and reap the benefits of advanced production that capitalism denies,

The poor in the United States would be considered wealthy in other parts of the world. Poor people in other parts of the world, notoriously Africa, do not lack basic material comfort because of capitalism. They lack it because of unstable political conditions.

Nothings unfair about it, it's as fair as you can get if you're working within capitalism. But my point is it is not possible for everyone to escape drudgery, only some can do it and others must remain at the bottom.

It's not possible because not everyone even tries to escape the drudgery. Those who try usually make it.

My sister goes to a university full of bourgeois public school kids. (who are horrible horrible disgusting people to her and in general) They have no intention of using their degree for anything other than vanity as they have connections so get given an employers job anyway. The boss chooses who succeeds him so nepotism rules the day in the bourgeois world, making it VERY difficult for someone working class to join the ranks of the bourgeois unless they have some sort of connections somehow.

Your anecdotal stories do nothing to disprove the fact that class is highly fluid and those who strive to succeed often will. Besides, you cannot guarantee or even assume that nepotism or cronyism would magically disappear under communism.

Starting up your own business which then grows up into a huge corporation is something virtually impossible nowadays and increasingly so as you have to compete with established giants.

This is the problem. You assume that success means nothing less than becoming CEO of IBM or Daimler-Chrysler.

Creating a global conglomerate is not the ultimate measure of success in capitalism. All you have to do is start a business where there is demand and you could very well be successful. Sometimes you don't even need any other employees. You can start your own restaurant; if your restaurant doesn't turn into McDonalds within 6 weeks that's not an indication of failure. You can borrow money to start a 7-11 franchise (that's what many immigrants to America do and they're highly successful - and they start out with even less than most poor Americans have!).

Is a guy who buys his own Semi and works as an independent contractor, who makes a decently comfortable life "successful" enough for you even if he doesn't turn out to be Donald Trump? What if he decides he's successful? Is he wrong and you are right? Why?

First fuck off-there's nothing wrong with wanting to live a comfortable life.

There is if you don't like the rules of the game to attain a comfortable life because you'd have to work too hard and so you demand the rules be changed.

I tell you what Matt, I demand that I get to be a star in the NFL. I suck at football, so I'm going to label the game unfair to me until I'm recognized as a football star.

Second fuck off-ad hominems are stupid and you're wrong I don't wish to do anything to achieve my ends. I won't be working a shit job for very long because I do have a plan to get a good job and I'm working in a crap job to raise money for educational purposes first.

According to your own logic you may as well not even try because you have no chance of success.

OK so what's your point? You said, it's not a problem that not everyone can get a cushy job because some people don't want a cushy job and choose family over material wealth. Not being able to afford a babysitter doesn't mean they don't care about getting a better paid job.

This is ridiculous, you're claiming the working class like being exploited now and this is your evidence?

All the more reason to condemn capitalism!

No, I'm not claiming the working class "like to be exploited". I'm telling you that many in the working class do not consider themselves exploited. They have little or no interest in material gain, as long as they have a roof and food there are other things that matter more to them. It's not that they haven't achieved your mythical "class consciousness", it's that they simply don't agree with you. Deal with it.

Quit claiming the moral highground it's annoying.

Same to you. Thinking you know what's best for everyone isn't moral at all.