If a capitalist owns a company, but it's losing money....

[Supermodel]

If a capitalist owns a company, but it's losing money, and she keeps putting more of her own savings into it, is she a smart socialist or a stupid capitalist?

footnote: she got the savings by working hard and not spending on herself.

[Hayduke]

neither of them......politics dont have anything to do with it...when you running your own company...........and afgorse she's smart she has to save the company........it cost her alot and to just drop it is useless......

[Capitalist]

If you contribute nothing to society.

Than you shall receive nothing in return.

[RedRevolutionary87]

i think owning a company is completely fine as long as you dont have slaves, oops i meant employees;), i fyou run the company and work there than its perfectly proletarian

[Supermodel]

Red you mean like a sole proprietorship? No the company I refer to has 35 employees and the capitalist manages it for no salary at all.

And she bought it from a really stupid socialist friend of Hillary Clinton's.

[RedRevolutionary87]

so all the money goes to the workers? if so than that is ok to, as long as the worker's surplus product isnt taken from them than that is perfectly fine

[Supermodel]

Right, in fact since the company is making a loss, more than all the money is going to the workers.

So is the capitalist suddenly a socialist until the stupid company starts making money again?

[RedRevolutionary87]

i would say no because their goal is still to make millions on that company, unless ofcorse it isnt there goal to make money then they are a socialist i guess

[samaniego]

I WOULD SAY YOU AT THIS POINT ARE NIETHER, A GOOD THIS OR THAT. WHAT YOU ARE IS A BAD BUSINESS PERSON. ETHICALLY IF YOU PROFIT AND SHARE YOUR A GOOD SOCIALIST IF YOU PROFIT AND DONT YOUR A GOOD CAPPIE. OF COURSE IF YOU LOSE MONEY AND FIRE YOUR EMPLOYEES TO STILL TURN A PROFIT YOUR AGAIN A GOOD CAPPIE AND SO ON. BUT THIS IS JUST A GENERALIZATION.

[vox]

The actions of any capitalist can only be defined by the social relations that surround her, and of which she is a part.

The decision to cut her losses or to continue in the hope of future profits is not at all tied to the fate of the workers but only to the bottom line of profit. Socialism, in a capitalist economy, does not play into this at all.

Socialism is not a capitalist over-extending herself.

vox

[El Che]

SM you need to exercise your mind. See its like a muscle, only through exercise can you get it in shape! And only a healthy mind can hope to grasp Socialism and Marxism.

[Supermodel]

I tried exercising my mind one time but I dislocated it. Was in a sling for two years. Now I try to take it easy.

So can we conclude the end of break-even politics? That politics is not an accounting entry, that profit is not bad and loss is not good, and vice versa?

[AgustoSandino]

you see el che excercises his/her mind by repeating old and tired marxists generalizations and pretending that the billions of people that disagree with him are simply deluded.

[El Che]

Your full of hot air, your acusations are worth nothing if you dont back them up son. You disagree with Marxist theory? then show me where it is wrong. Can you do it? If you disagree you have to know it, and have reasons why you disagree. Come present them, tell us where Marxism failed augostos, explain to us that you know what you disdain before you desdain it!

If you do not I will have to conclude you a fool and a child not worthy of my atention.

[vox]

No reply to poor vox? Supermodel? Agusto? No one has anything to say to my post?

Too scared?

vox

[Supermodel]

Well vox I don't have any problem with what you said.

I'm just asking these questions to see what folks think about being of a socialist political mind while living in a capitalist state under capitalist working conditions and participating in the rewards of a capitalist life. If it is not possible to do so, then no US citizen can claim to be a socialist, nor can anyone who does not live under socialism.

While I admire Che's approach to what I would call post-materialism, the rejection of material comforts, as a true quality in a man and a demonstration of a life in empathy with the poor, (i.e. like a religious vow of poverty) I don't equate that with socialism.

Furthermore, if I was Aleida, and I'm not, I would have told Che to knock it off with the poverty schtick. I bet after he was killed she got herself a decent car and some clothes.

[Michael De Panama]

They are still capitalists, no matter how you slice it. You even said it yourself that they are capitalists. Are you trying to trick us?