How can this be justified?

[spartan]

Right this one is aimed at the Capitalists here.

Right so we know that it is the workers who do the majority of work in the workplace and yet it is the owners of the workplace who get most of the profit made by all this hard work done by their employees, so how is this fair?

How can this be justified?

[pusher robot]

Right this one is aimed at the Capitalists here.

Right so we know that it is the workers who do the majority of work in the workplace and yet it is the owners of the workplace who get most of the profit made by all this hard work done by their employees, so how is this fair?

How can this be justified?

I challenge your assumption that it requires justification.

[Kaiza Killa]

It isn't fair but it is justifiable. The workers should rejoice in the prospect of having work in the first place. Particularly if their wages are sturdy, and if their over-time is paid for them!

Kaiza Killa
-Tetragrammaton-

[PRC-UTE]

I challenge your assumption that it requires justification.

Why is expropriating another's labour rewarded, but expropriating another person's television isn't?

[Bud Struggle]

Right this one is aimed at the Capitalists here.

Right so we know that it is the workers who do the majority of work in the workplace and yet it is the owners of the workplace who get most of the profit made by all this hard work done by their employees, so how is this fair?

How can this be justified?

Faulty premise. The workers do very little work in the workplace. They didn't "create" the workplace. They didn't create the work. They don't supply the orders for the finished product. They don't supply the raw material to create the finished product. They didn't design the product. They didn't build the machine that makes the product. They didn't design the machine that makes the product. They didn't build the factory that makes the product. They didn't buy the land that the factory is on.

Workers press a button on some machine and they are paid for their time and service.

All fair.

[Robert]

we know that it is the workers who do the majority of work in the workplaceNo, "we" don't "know" that. Most businesses, in the USA anyway, and I suspect throughout the industrialized world, are small businesses. They are closely and often family-owned. They can't afford to work less than the employees. And they don't really want to. They created the business, often out of nothing, because they love what they do or they are economically ambitious. So they are as often as not the first one in and the last to leave.

Large corporations I have little first-hand experience with, but I think any research you perform will reveal that managers and executives of medium and large sized companies work at least as much as laborers and insome cases 25% to 50% more.

What is the basis for your belief that owners and executive don't work as much as what you call "workers"?

[IcarusAngel]

Faulty premise.

It isn't a "faulty premise."


The workers do very little work in the workplace.

A flat out lie. Many workers under oppressive contracts are the source of nearly all the creativity and new designs that occur within said work place. Even the ex-VP of GE once said that GE itself was responsible for absolutely no new invention. (Quoted in Democracy for the Few.)


They didn't "create" the workplace.

Likely the capitalists didn't "create" the workplace, either. Construction workers did. Therefore, they should have a small say in how it is used.


They didn't create the work.

Human demand creates the need for work, which has existed far before capitalism.


They don't supply the orders for the finished product.

I disagree. They do.


They don't supply the raw material to create the finished product.

Maybe, maybe not. Maybe other workers do.


They didn't design the product.

Another lie. Like I said, most of the creativity comes from the workers themselves, not from the oppressive capitalists.

Just like how government scientists are responsible for numerous great inventions, not the "President," or CEO of America Incorporated, himself.

Governments are the same as corporations, unjustified monopolies over land. Marxists are correct in this regard.


They didn't build the machine that makes the product. They didn't design the machine that makes the product. They didn't build the factory that makes the product.

Who do you think does do all the manual labor inside of a corporation? The CEO?

LOL. This is proof capitalists are brainwashed.


They didn't buy the land that the factory is on.

Quite likely, neither did the capitalists. Most of the currently owned "land" was bought up by the capitalists or given to them years ago by the government or whatever, before everybody here was even born. Then this "owned land" is continually handed down to other capitalists over time, all while oppressing workers and stealing ideas because of monopolies, who hold the current monopoly on it.

Capitalists like you are too stupid to understand the history of monopolies, land grabs, and governmental policies in regards to property, to the point where you can find no real true ownership of the land even by capitalist standards.

Human inventions and creativity vary in the ways that they can be considered ideas or property or whatever, to the point where there's no real way to trace what is or isn't the most contributive factor to a certain piece of property, or to determine who has a monopoly on it.

Furthermore, capitalists themselves never "created" the land themselves, so by your own fucking argument they should have no right to it, and everybody should have a say in how it can or can't be used. Certainly, the should have a say when it comes to monopolies.


Workers press a button on some machine and they are paid for their time and service.

Speak for yourself.

[Robert]

I hope you know that many capitalists were at one time simple wage earners who worked harder than they had to, got promotions and raises, saved some of their excess wages instead of pissing it away on video games, beer, and sex, and used the savings to open a business and offer jobs to otherwise unemployed people, and offer interesting, useful products to grateful consumers.

They thereby became "capitalists" and should be commended. What is your complaint with that?

[Sendo]

if this were flatly true all it would prove is that those who are comparatively harder workers are rewarded, but it still doesn't redress the misery that everyone else must endure.

Let's say there are 10 shoe builders at a factory. If all 10 work the same amount of overtime who is rewarded? Let's say everyone works 60 hours a week to get ahead and one guy worked 65 hours, now he gets rewarded. What if everyone worked 70 hours a week, would someone have to work 75 hours to get recognition?

But this has little basis in reality. If hard work meant promotions and rising to the class of the capitalists, then how would there ever be such a thing as "a dead end job"? There are many jobs in which you will never accumulate wealth or rise to a high position, not without luck.

This whole dream of rising through the classes is the carrot on the end of a stick that dangles before the eyes of workers. IT gets them to work harder and be miserable in pointless and redundant work that pisses them off and endangers the world we live in. Think of how much labor gets wasted packaging competing food (of the same type of food of course) and how much of it will spoil. Or of how many people must build cars when we should question the necessity of cars and the necessity of a car-culture-oriented infrastructure. How many ridiculous billboars must be built and rebuilt for competing products and services.

[Bilan]

It isn't fair but it is justifiable. The workers should rejoice in the prospect of having work in the first place. Particularly if their wages are sturdy, and if their over-time is paid for them!

Kaiza Killa
-Tetragrammaton-

Workers should not be grateful to those who rule, despise, and rob them. They should reorganize society for the benefit of all, and resist those who attempt to force the old society upon them once more.

That includes Nazi scum like yourself.

[Joby]

Right this one is aimed at the Capitalists here.

Right so we know that it is the workers who do the majority of work in the workplace and yet it is the owners of the workplace who get most of the profit made by all this hard work done by their employees, so how is this fair?

How can this be justified?

Uh, well, didn't they agree to do x amount of work for y amount of compensation?

[Zurdito]

Uh, well, didn't they agree to do x amount of work for y amount of compensation?

so did feudal serfs, would you have upheld feudalism therefore?

[Joby]

so did feudal serfs, would you have upheld feudalism therefore?

At the time, of course.

Would you want to take on the invading Vikings alone?

Not that I believe feudal serfs had the choices, or opportunity, every person in a truly capitalist nation does.

[luxemburg89]

Faulty premise. The workers do very little work in the workplace. They didn't "create" the workplace. They didn't create the work. They don't supply the orders for the finished product. They don't supply the raw material to create the finished product. They didn't design the product. They didn't build the machine that makes the product. They didn't design the machine that makes the product. They didn't build the factory that makes the product.

Congratulations, you have won our 'Moronic Waste of Human Sperm of the Month Award'. Forgive me for being pedantic, but to be honest I really don't care what you think of me so I'm going to attack your post in the hope that you will retaliate - thus providing more evidence of why your father would have been better off receiving a blow-job (or just wanking into a tissue) rather than producing you.


The workers do very little work in the workplace

You must consider the whole picture - though I recognise your brain probably hurts dealing with more than one item at a time - all the workers collectively do all the work, and individually play a small part in creating whatever it is they create.


They didn't "create" the workplace.

No, but they populate it. The people of London didn't really 'create' London as a place but I think it is safe to say that should be controlled by the Londoners.


They didn't create the work

No, but they DO the work. Humans didn't create the Earth - that was billions of years of reactions and explosions and collisions and many other wonderful scientific words (or done by a bearded paedophile in six days depending on whether you're insane or not) - but I think we have every right to say, along with other species, that the world belongs to us.


They don't supply the orders for the finished product.

Of course, because giving an order is comparable to actually doing the menial task of carrying it out? ****.


They don't supply the raw material to create the finished product.

No, that would be the Earth. Extracted with the help of workers using diggers and drills to dig it up, and then transported by workers driving lorries, methinks.


They didn't design the product

Really, a lizard with severe brain damage could design a sofa...how is that sofa design coming, by the way?


They didn't build the machine that makes the product.

Well, that is because other workers at another factory built it. You see the proletariat are a collective that all work together to serve fat, rich people, who would be useless at the job they do. You're not doing very well, are you?


They didn't design the machine that makes the product.

No. I did.


They didn't build the factory that makes the product

Other workers did that. Try looking at the working-class as a whole. Now to summarise I have two pieces of advice:

1. Find a small, dark corner.
2. Go and die in it.

While the workers may only lift their fingers to push buttons, the capitalists don't even bother to lift a finger.

P.S. ComradeJ thinks your mum is a slag.

[Comrade J]

P.S. ComradeJ thinks your mum is a slag.

Yeah.

[Zurdito]

Not that I believe feudal serfs had the choices, or opportunity, every person in a truly capitalist nation does.


No one said they did. Marx explicitly said they didn't. I was just refuting your inadequate example which applied equally to feudalism, not saying that feudalism=capitalism

[Robert]

if this were flatly true all it would prove is that those who are comparatively harder workers are rewarded, but it still doesn't redress the misery that everyone else must endure.Lots of problems here: First, I didn't make the claim that everyone who works hard is rewarded, or that many don't get left behind. My only point -- and it certainly is "flatly true" -- was that the term "capitalist" comprises many who have worked and who continue to work more than their own employees. The assumption among too many here is that all "capitalists" inherited their wealth (and that they are necessarily wealthy -- some do go broke), and now just sit around eating and smoking expensive cigars. Those who do this are few and far between and often lose their shirts because they're not paying attention.

If you are in the workforce and join a small company, you will witness this first hand.

Second, I don't know that "everyone else" is miserable. Many are. Many are not.

[Bud Struggle]

Congratulations, you have won our 'Moronic Waste of Human Sperm of the Month Award'. Forgive me for being pedantic, but to be honest I really don't care what you think of me so I'm going to attack your post in the hope that you will retaliate - thus providing more evidence of why your father would have been better off receiving a blow-job (or just wanking into a tissue) rather than producing you.



You must consider the whole picture - though I recognise your brain probably hurts dealing with more than one item at a time - all the workers collectively do all the work, and individually play a small part in creating whatever it is they create.



No, but they populate it. The people of London didn't really 'create' London as a place but I think it is safe to say that should be controlled by the Londoners.



No, but they DO the work. Humans didn't create the Earth - that was billions of years of reactions and explosions and collisions and many other wonderful scientific words (or done by a bearded paedophile in six days depending on whether you're insane or not) - but I think we have every right to say, along with other species, that the world belongs to us.



Of course, because giving an order is comparable to actually doing the menial task of carrying it out? ****.



No, that would be the Earth. Extracted with the help of workers using diggers and drills to dig it up, and then transported by workers driving lorries, methinks.



Really, a lizard with severe brain damage could design a sofa...how is that sofa design coming, by the way?



Well, that is because other workers at another factory built it. You see the proletariat are a collective that all work together to serve fat, rich people, who would be useless at the job they do. You're not doing very well, are you?



No. I did.



Other workers did that. Try looking at the working-class as a whole. Now to summarise I have two pieces of advice:

1. Find a small, dark corner.
2. Go and die in it.

While the workers may only lift their fingers to push buttons, the capitalists don't even bother to lift a finger.

P.S. ComradeJ thinks your mum is a slag.

Stop with the nicities and tell me what you REALLY think! :lol:

You're sweet and you believe. I can't fault a word you say.

Love,

TomK

[luxemburg89]

TomK - I'm sorry to bring thus up, but you quote yourself in your signature. That's the first sign of being an utterly contemptable arsehole. You also just wasted valuable time replying to my post - you've cut down on your suicide time. Though judging by the manner in which you post you died mentally a long time ago.

I know I'm sweet, I'm me. And, in the words of a José Mourinho puppet, 'I'm fantastic. Be Champions!'

[Bud Struggle]

TomK - I'm sorry to bring thus up, but you quote yourself in your signature. That's the first sign of being an utterly contemptable arsehole. You also just wasted valuable time replying to my post - you've cut down on your suicide time. Though judging by the manner in which you post you died mentally a long time ago.

I know I'm sweet, I'm me. And, in the words of a José Mourinho puppet, 'I'm fantastic. Be Champions!'

Kissies. :wub:

[luxemburg89]

hmmm, bored of you now TomK - I might go to bed, with it being 2am. All that's left to say is that when I wake up in the morning I hope you are no longer on the planet. While you do have some comic value, the sheer stupidity of your being offends the majority of humanity. 'In that sleep of death' (Hamlet) - with that in mind please, goodnight.

[Bud Struggle]

hmmm, bored of you now TomK - I might go to bed, with it being 2am. All that's left to say is that when I wake up in the morning I hope you are no longer on the planet. While you do have some comic value, the sheer stupidity of your being offends the majority of humanity. 'In that sleep of death' (Hamlet) - with that in mind please, goodnight.

Sweet dreams. I'm 6' 1", 180 lbs. A bit old for most LRers, dark wavy hair, pretty well off financially, with a Bentley.

Ever been to the Bahamas?

PM me. (With picture in bikini.) ;)

Tom

[Joby]

A flat out lie. Many workers under oppressive contracts are the source of nearly all the creativity and new designs that occur within said work place. Even the ex-VP of GE once said that GE itself was responsible for absolutely no new invention. (Quoted in Democracy for the Few.)

And were the workers forced into these "oppressive contracts?" Did GE, or DuPont, or Microsoft, or Pfizer, put a gun to this person's head and tell them to either join or die?

Or did they invest thousands of $'s towards their education and training? It's kinda like they're indentured servants, and agreed to x amount of sevitude for y amount of moneymaking potential.


Likely the capitalists didn't "create" the workplace, either. Construction workers did. Therefore, they should have a small say in how it is used.

Uhhhhhh, NO.

The capitalists didn't pay the construction workers to manage the building in any way, shape, or form . They paid an agreed upon wage to build the structure. That's the contract, the deal ends there.

Likwise, any dumbass decision the owners of the company make doesn't affect te construction workers wages in any way--and is why the construction workers shouldn't be able to affect decisions in the future.


Human demand creates the need for work, which has existed far before capitalism.

And capitalists believe that the humans who demand should compensate those who supply.


I disagree. They do.

wonder why?


Maybe, maybe not. Maybe other workers do.

fo' sho'



Another lie. Like I said, most of the creativity comes from the workers themselves, not from the oppressive capitalists.


Workers working to make money.


Just like how government scientists are responsible for numerous great inventions, not the "President," or CEO of America Incorporated, himself.

The President, or the CEO, or TomK, is creating a place for this innovation to occur, and for discovering the highest amount of efficiency for any demand.

Well, except the President. It's not like there's really a budget when you're him.


Governments are the same as corporations, unjustified monopolies over land. Marxists are correct in this regard.

Governments exist to protect individuals from foreign oppression, and to ensure that every person is guaranteed equal rights as others.

Well, at least that is the ideal.


Who do you think does do all the manual labor inside of a corporation? The CEO?

So?



Quite likely, neither did the capitalists. Most of the currently owned "land" was bought up by the capitalists or given to them years ago by the government or whatever, before everybody here was even born. Then this "owned land" is continually handed down to other capitalists over time, all while oppressing workers and stealing ideas because of monopolies, who hold the current monopoly on it.


First...a lot of people own land and paid very little for it up front. Or nothing.

Second, what groups own land the government gave them years ago? at least, those that don't play a role in our modern infrastructure. The majority of people the government gave land to was with a program that gave you 120 acres for just sittin on it for 5 years.


Capitalists like you are too stupid to understand the history of monopolies,

Sorry dude, but fuck you.



land grabs,

Yeah, so? There isn't unlimited amounts of land, and people should have to pay more to live in a place were many other people want to live.


and governmental policies in regards to property,

Yes, you're land, mouth, religion, and thought are yours. That's your property and the government can't touch it.


to the point where you can find no real true ownership of the land even by capitalist standards.

What is the true value of land? :confused:

I say it's defined by what people are willing to pay for it, regardless of it;s locale.


Human inventions and creativity vary in the ways that they can be considered ideas or property or whatever, to the point where there's no real way to trace what is or isn't the most contributive factor to a certain piece of property, or to determine who has a monopoly on it.

What?



Furthermore, capitalists themselves never "created" the land themselves, so by your own fucking argument they should have no right to it, and everybody should have a say in how it can or can't be used. Certainly, the should have a say when it comes to monopolies.


Of course they have a right to it.

As long as their government/state/militia is the strongest one around.

[spartan]

And were the workers forced into these "oppressive contracts?" Did GE, or DuPont, or Microsoft, or Pfizer, put a gun to this person's head and tell them to either join or die?
Yes actually its called coercion.

You see its rather simple, if you dont have a job you dont earn money and if you dont earn money you cant buy food, which means that you will eventually starve to death.

And you defend this type of system that we are forced to work in!

[pusher robot]

Yes actually its called coercion.

You see its rather simple, if you dont have a job you dont earn money and if you dont earn money you cant buy food, which means that you will eventually starve to death.

And you defend this type of system that we are forced to work in!

That's not a product of "the system," it is a result of the physical laws of the universe. If you do not expend energy to maintain your existence, you will die. Free systems do not try to deny this natural law, but let individuals plan their survival strategy however they best see fit.

[careyprice31]

I spent my time in this thread cracking up laughing at tomk and luxembourg

oh my. The two of you......

the words you use...kissies and wanking off in tissue, moronic sperm wastage of the month....

you guys are very funny......i needed laugh today. Thanks.

:lol: